Saadul Singh @ Sardulsingh vs State Of Rajasthan

Learned Public Prosecutor Shri Anil Joshi has chosen not to file reply to the instant application for suspension of sentences. He proposes to argue the matter orally.

Heard on the application for suspension of sentences.

Perused the material available on record.

Shri Godara, learned counsel representing the accused applicant vehemently and fervently urges that the entire prosecution case as against the appellant applicant Saddul Singh @ Sardul Singh is false and fabricated. The evidence of extrajudicial confession is attributed to the co-accused Sonu. The accused-applicant has been implicated in this case simply on the strength of the flimsy evidence of last seen given by the witness Shankar (PW.8) and the recovery of piece of rope which by itself is totally dubitable. He submits that the applicant - appellant was on bail during the course of trial and he did not misuse the liberty so granted to him. He thus, craves acceptance of the instant application for suspension of sentences.

Learned Public Prosecutor, on the other hand, vehemently and fervently opposed the submissions advanced by the learned counsel representing the accused appellant. He urged that there is strong circumstantial evidence available on record so as to connect the appellant with the crime. He thus, urged that the accused does not deserve indulgence of bail.

The evidence of last seen which the prosecution portrayed against the accused appellant is in the form of the statement of Shankar (PW.8). Manifestly, the investigational statement of this witness was recorded after a significant delay. The evidence of extrajudicial confession is attributed to the co-accused Sonu.

In this background and considering the fact that the accused appellant was on bail during the course of trial and he did not misuse the liberty so granted to him, we accept the instant application for suspension of sentences.

Accordingly, the instant application for suspension of sentences filed under Section 389 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the sentences passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Suratgarh, Sriganganagar vide judgment dated 04.12.2018 in Sessions Case No.17/2012 (09/2012) (CIS No.144/2015) against the appellant-applicant Saadul Singh @ Sardulsingh S/o Bhagwan Singh shall remain suspended till final disposal of the aforesaid appeal and he shall be released on bail, provided he executes personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for his appearance in this Court on 15.04.2019 and whenever ordered to do so till the disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated below:-

That he/she/they will appear before the trial Court in the month of January of every year till the appeal is decided.

That if the applicant(s) changes the place of residence, he/she/they will give in writing his/her/their changed address to the trial Court as well as to the counsel in the High Court.

Similarly, if the sureties change their address(s), they will give in writing their changed address to the trial Court.

The learned trial Court shall keep the record of attendance of the accused-applicant(s) in a separate file. Such file be registered as Criminal Misc. Case related to original case in which the accused-applicant(s) was/were tried and convicted. A copy of this order shall also be placed in that file for ready reference. Criminal Misc. file shall not be taken into account for statistical purpose relating to pendency and disposal of cases in the trial court. In case the said accused applicant(s) does not appear before the trial court, the learned trial Judge shall report the matter to the High Court for cancellation of bail.