High CourtsDivision Bench

Surendra Kumar vs State Of Rajasthan

Rajasthan High Court · Decided on 3 January 2022 · Citation: (2022) 01 RAJ CK 0005

HON’BLE JUDGES
Sandeep Mehta, J · Birendra Kumar, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 173(8), 319, 389 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 148, 149, 302, 307, 323, 341
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
D.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 883 Of 2021
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

27 paragraphs · 483 words

Offences,Sentences,Fine,Fine Default sentences

Section 302/149 IPC,Life Imprisonment,"Rs.10,000/-",2 Months’ S.I.

Section 307/149 IPC,7 Years’ R.I.,"Rs.5,000/-",1 Month’s S.I

Section 341 IPC,1 Month’s S.I.,,

Section 148 IPC,1 Year’s S.I.,Rs.1000/-,15 Days’ S.I.

Section 323/149 IPC,6 Months’ S.I.,Rs.500/-,7 Days’ S.I.

report (Ex.P/15) and while preparing injury report (Ex.P/16) of the injured Pradeep.,,,

In this background, we find merit in the contention of the learned defence counsel that there has been an attempt of wholesale over-implication by the",,,

material prosecution witnesses while naming the accused as assailants in this case. As the allegation regarding lathi blows having been inflicted to the,,,

deceased and the injured Pradeep is not corroborated by the medical evidence. The appellant was on bail during the course of the trial and since he,,,

made no attempt to misuse the liberty so granted to him, we are of the opinion that he deserves indulgence of bail during pendency of the appeal.â€​",,,

Learned Public Prosecutor as well as the learned counsel for the complainant are not in position to dispute the fact that the case of the present,,,

applicant stands on identical footing to that of co-accused Sunil and Rakesh, who have already been released on bail.",,,

Accordingly, the application for suspension of sentences filed under Section 389 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the sentences passed by the",,,

learned Additional Sessions Judge No.2, Hanumangarh vide judgment dated 13.09.2021 in Sessions Case No.4/2016 against the appellant-applicant",,,

Surendra Kumar S/o Ramkumar shall remain suspended till final disposal of the aforesaid appeal and he shall be released on bail, provided he executes",,,

a 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 04.02.2022 and whenever ordered to do so till the disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated below:-,,,

1.

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

2.

That if the applicant changes the place of residence, he will give in writing his changed address to the trial Court as well as to the counsel in the",,,

High Court.,,,

3.

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 in a separate file. Such file be registered as Criminal Misc. Case,,,

related to original case in which the accused-applicant was 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 does not appear before the trial court, the learned trial Judge shall report the matter to the High Court for cancellation of",,,

bail.,,,