Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
Arun Bhansali, Rajendra Prakash Soni, JJ.
Kalyan Singh S/o Shri Gautam Singh and ors. - Petitioners
Versus
State of Rajasthan - Respondent
D.B. Criminal Misc. Suspension of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 1193, 574, 1067 of 2023
Decided On : 10-10-2023
Suspension of Sentence - Conviction Appeal - IPC 147, 323/149, 458, 364, 302/149, 120-B, 201/149 - The court suspended the substantive sentence of the applicants during the pendency of the appeal.
Fact of the Case:
The applicants were convicted for various offences under the Indian Penal Code (IPC) in relation to an incident involving the burning to death of a young lady who had married in a different caste. The trial court's decision was based on contradictory and vacillating statements of witnesses.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the evidence against the applicants was not strong and highlighted the contradictions in the statements of witnesses. It also noted that the trial court had acquitted other accused based on similar evidence, leading to the decision to suspend the substantive sentence of the applicants during the appeal.
Issues: The main issue was the conviction of the applicants based on contradictory and vacillating statements of witnesses, especially when other accused had been acquitted based on similar evidence.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision to suspend the substantive sentence of the applicants was influenced by the contradictions in the statements of witnesses and the acquittal of other accused based on similar evidence.
Final Decision: The court allowed the applications for suspension of sentence and ordered that the substantive sentence of the applicants shall remain suspended till the final disposal of the appeal, provided they execute a personal bond and fulfill certain conditions.
ORDER :
1. These applications seeking suspension of sentence have been filed by applicants, namely, Kalyan Singh, Gajendra Singh, Ishwar Singh S/o Bheru Singh and Ranjeet Singh in relation to judgment passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Sagwara, District Dungarpur dated 12.05.2023 passed in Session Case No.36/2018 (Old No.33/2016 & 25/2016), whereby the applicants have been convicted for offences under Sections 147, 323/149, 458, 364, 302/149, 120-B and 201/149 of IPC and sentenced as infra:
| Offences | Sentence | Fine |
| 147 IPC | Two Years’ rigorous imprisonment | Rs.5000/- with default stipulation to further undergo one month’s additional simple imprisonment. |
| 323/149 IPC | One Year’s rigorous imprisonment | Rs.1000/- with default stipulation to further undergo fifteen days’ additional simple imprisonment. |
| 458 IPC | Fourteen Years’ rigorous imprisonment | Rs.5000/- with default stipulation to further undergo one month’s additional simple imprisonment. |
| 364 IPC | Imprisonment for Life | Rs.50,000/- with default stipulation to further undergo six months’ additional simple imprisonment. |
| 302/149 IPC | Imprisonment for Life | Rs.50,000/- with default stipulation to further undergo six months’ additional simple imprisonment. |
| 120B IPC | Imprisonment for Life | Rs.50,000/- with default stipulation to further undergo six months’ additional simple imprisonment. |
| 201/149 IPC | Seven Years’ rigorous imprisonment | Rs.5000/- with default stipulation to further undergo one month’s additional simple imprisonment. |
2. Learned counsel for the applicants made submissions that the trial court committed grave error in convicting the applicants for the offences alleged. It was emphasized that Challan was filed against as many as 26 accused, out of which 5 including applicants have been convicted and rest of them have been acquitted. It was further submitted that initially Challan was filed against 15 persons and investigation was kept pending against rest of the accused under Section 173 (8) Cr.P.C. Whereafter, after three years, second Challan was filed against 3 persons and more than one and half year, after filing of second Challan, third Challan was filed against 8 persons. It was submitted that while against Kalyan Singh and Gajendra Singh, Challan was filed in the first instance against Ranjeet Singh and Ishwar Singh, the same was filed after four and half years of the incident, which it is alleged, was committed on 04.03.2016.
3. It was emphasized that when written report dated 05.03.2016 (Ex.P/1) was filed by the mother-in-law of the deceased, the allegations were made against Laxman Singh, Praveen Singh and 30-35 other persons from their family, whereby Praveen Singh and Laxman Singh etc. took away the deceased and after pouring kerosene over her, she was burnt to death.
4. In the statements recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. (Ex.D/ 1), said Smt. Kalawati (PW.1), mother-in-law of the deceased, gave out names of as many as 30 persons and alleged that Praveen Singh and Laxman Singh took out the deceased from the home, she was taken in front of Laxmi Narayan temple, wherein Laxman Singh and Praveen Singh, poured kerosene on her. Laxman Singh lit the matchstick and burnt her daughter-in-law to death.
5. The said mother-in-law of the deceased was examined as PW.1 and her statements were recorded on three different occasions, i.e. as and when the supplementary charge sheets were filed. In her statements as PW.1, she, for the first time, specifically roped in Ishwar Singh, Kalyan Singh, Gajendra Singh and several others and made allegations regarding their involvement in the incident. She made specific allegations that kerosene was poured by Moti Kanwar, Preven Singh and Pratap Kanwar. For several accused, she indicated that they were not involved. She also indicated that thos
The central legal point established in the judgment is the consideration of contradictory and vacillating statements of witnesses in deciding the suspension of the substantive sentence during the app....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the inadmissibility of confessions without the mandatory certificate under Section 65-B of the Evidence Act and the improper admission of call deta....
The reliability of a dying declaration can be questioned based on the victim's physical condition and the presence of contradictions in medical testimony, impacting the admissibility of such evidence....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the Court has the discretion to suspend the sentence of the Appellants during the pendency of the appeals, considering the principles laid dow....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of substantive evidence and link evidence to establish guilt in criminal cases, and the consideration of bail during the pendenc....
The judgment underscores the importance of eyewitness testimony and medical evidence in establishing guilt in serious criminal cases, particularly murder.
An appellate court will only suspend a sentence pending appeal if the applicant demonstrates a strong prima facie case for acquittal; routine discrepancies in police documents, such as site plans, do....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
