Teju vs State of Rajasthan

This third application seeking suspension of sentence is filed by the applicant, who has been convicted for the offences under sections 148, 364 and 302 read with 149 of IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment.

Learned Public Prosecutor does not want to file reply to the application.

Accordingly, the application preferred is being considered on merits.

The first and second applications seeking suspension of sentence preferred by the applicant were dismissed by this Court as not pressed, vide orders dated 04.12.2017 and 27.07.2018 passed in D.B. Criminal Misc Suspension of Sentence Applications (Appeal) No. 881/2017 and 526/2018, respectively.

Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that all the co-convict have been enlarged on bail and the case against the applicant is not distinguishable. It is submitted that though at the instance of the applicant, an axe was recovered, but no specific injury is attributed to the applicant. It is submitted that no incise wound was found on the person of the deceased and thus apparently, no injury is alleged to have been caused by sharp side of the axe.

Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submitted that the applicant is behind the bars for last more than six and half years, therefore, while maintaining the parity qua co-convict, the sentence awarded to the applicant also deserves to be suspended.

Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the application seeking suspension of sentence, however, it is not disputed that none of the injuries found on the person of deceased could be attributed to have been caused by sharp side of the axe. It is also not disputed that no specific injury caused is assigned to the applicant herein. However, learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the applicant had motive to cause death of deceased, inasmuch as the applicant's wife had illicit relationship with the deceased.

Having considered the submissions and taking into consideration totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, we consider it appropriate to suspend the substantive sentence awarded to the applicant.

Accordingly, the third application for suspension of sentence preferred on behalf of applicant, is allowed and it is ordered that the substantive sentence passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gulabpura, District Bhilwara vide judgment dated 05.11.2015 in Session Case No.09/2013 against the applicant, Teju S/o Shri Lalu, shall remain suspended till final disposal of the aforesaid criminal appeal provided he executes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- alongwith two sureties in the sum of Rs.50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court for his appearance in this Court on 16.01.2020 and subsequently before the trial court on the following conditions: -

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

That if the appellant-applicant changes the place of residence, he will give the changed address in writing to the trial court, High Court as well as to his counsel in the High Court.

Similarly if sureties change their addresses, 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 appellant in a separate file. Such file be registered as Criminal Misc. Case related to the Sessions Case in which the accused appellant 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 does not appear before the trial court, the learned trial Judge shall report the matter to the High Court for cancellation of bail.