HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
Sandeep Mehta, Rameshwar Vyas, JJ.
Ranjeetram – Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan – Respondent
D.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Suspension of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 225 of 2022
Decided On : 13-04-2022
Suspension of Sentence - Section 389 CrPC - The court allowed the application for suspension of sentence under Section 389 Cr.P.C. and ordered that the sentences against the appellant-applicant shall remain suspended till the final disposal of the appeal, and he shall be released on bail with certain conditions.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant-applicant had been convicted and sentenced for various offenses including Section 302 IPC, Section 201 IPC, and 120-B IPC. The prosecution case was based on circumstantial evidence, including extra-judicial confession, last seen, and recoveries.
Finding of the Court:
The court considered the submissions from the appellant-applicant's representative and the learned Public Prosecutor, and noted that the co-accused's applications for suspension of sentences had been accepted, and the case of the accused appellant was not distinguishable from that of the co-accused released on bail. Therefore, the appellant also deserved bail.
Issues: The main issue was whether the appellant-applicant should be granted bail through the suspension of sentence under Section 389 Cr.P.C.
Ratio Decidendi: The court found that the appellant's case was not distinguishable from that of the co-accused who had been released on bail, and therefore, the appellant deserved bail through the suspension of sentence.
Final Decision: The application for suspension of sentence filed under Section 389 Cr.P.C. was allowed, and the sentences against the appellant-applicant were ordered to remain suspended till the final disposal of the appeal, and he was to be released on bail with certain conditions.
JUDGMENT
1. The instant application for suspension of sentence under Section 389 CrPC has been preferred on behalf of the appellant-applicant Ranjeetram @ Sonu S/o Nakshtraram, who has been convicted and sentenced as below vide the judgment dated 28.09.2021 passed by the learned additional Sessions Judge, Sri Karanpur, District Sri Ganganagar in Sessions Case No.7/2017.
| Offence for which convicted | Sentence, fine and default sentence awarded |
| Section 302 IPC | Life imprisonment alongwith a fine of Rs.2000/- and in default of payment of fine, further to undergo rigorous imprisonment of one month |
| Section 201 IPC | Rigorous imprisonment of 7 years alongwith a fine of Rs.2000/- and in default of payment of fine, further to undergo rigorous imprisonment of one month |
| 120-B IPC | Life imprisonment alongwith a fine of Rs.2000/- and in default of payment of fine, further to undergo rigorous imprisonment of one month |
2. Learned Public Prosecutor has filed reply to the application for suspension of sentence.
3. We have heard and considered the submissions advanced by Ms. Kuber Choudhary, representing the appellant-applicant and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.
4. The prosecution case is based totally on circumstantial evidence in the form of extra-judicial confession, last seen and recoveries. The allegation of extra-judicial confession was attributed to the co-accused Smt. Ramandeep Kaur. The Investigating Officer claimed that the dead body of Mr. Jasvinder Singh was recovered on the strength of the informations provided by the applicant herein and the co-accused Rajendra Pal @ Raju. The applications for suspension of sentences filed on behalf of the Rajendra Pal @ Raju and Smt. Ramandep Kaur have been accepted by this court vide order dated 15.03.2022. The case of the accused appellant is in no manner distinguishable from that of the co-accused released on bail. Hence, the appellant also deserves indulgence of bail in this case.
5. accordingly, the application for suspension of sentence filed under Section 389 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the sentences passed by the learned additional Sessions Judge, Sri Karanpur, District Sri Ganganagar vide judgment dated 28.09.2021 in Sessions Case No.7/2017 against the appellant-applicant Ranjeetram @ Sonu S/o Nakshtraram 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 13.05.2022 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.
6. 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.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of Section 389 Cr.P.C. for the suspension of sentence and granting bail to the appellant-applicant based on the similarity of his c....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the inadmissibility of extra-judicial confession and detailed confessions recorded by a police officer at the police station, violating Sections 24....
Under Section 389 of Cr.P.C., a sentence can be suspended during the appeal process, contingent upon the provision of a personal bond and sureties.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the court's discretion to suspend sentences under Section 389 Cr.P.C. during the pendency of an appeal, based on the circumstances of the case and ....
Suspension of sentence during appeal requires assessment of prima facie merits and exceptional circumstances, balancing incarceration duration against the nature of the conviction.
The court established that under Section 389 of Cr.P.C., a sentence can be suspended during the appeal process if justified by the circumstances of the case.
The court has the discretion to grant suspension of sentences and release the appellant-applicant on bail during the pendency of the appeal under Section 389 Cr.P.C.
The court has the discretion to suspend substantive sentences under Section 389 Cr.P.C. based on the arguments and facts of the case.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.