Back
VIJAY BISHNOI, GOVERDHAN BARDHAR
Narendra Sharma – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
JUDGMENT
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties on the application for suspension of sentences.
2. Learned counsel for the appellant-applicant has submitted that the first application for suspension of sentences preferred on behalf of the appellant-applicant was dismissed as not pressed by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court on 5.3.2020. It is further submitted that till date, the accused-appellant has undergone sentence of six years and there is no likelihood that the appeal preferred by him will be heard in near future. It is also submitted that the trial court has grossly erred in convicting and sentencing the appellant-applicant vide impugned judgment. Learned counsel for the appellant-applicant while inviting attention of this Court towards the statements of two eye witnesses namely Vijendra Singh (PW-1) and Bablu (PW-2) has submitted that though, as per the prosecution story, these eye witnesses have seen the incident, but they did not lodge any FIR in relation to the said incident and even their statements were recorded by the police after 3 days and 23 days respectively of the incident. It is also argued that it is a case of accident, however, due to enmity between the partie
The court established that sentences can be suspended based on the duration already served and the conditions of appearance during the appeal process.
The court established that a lack of direct evidence from eyewitnesses can be a substantial ground for suspending a sentence pending appeal.
The court established that a conviction must be supported by credible evidence, and the absence of such evidence can lead to suspension of sentence.
The court established that a conviction must be supported by credible evidence, and the lack thereof can lead to the suspension of a sentence.
Identification of accused by eye witnesses and nature of injuries considered for suspension of sentence application.
The presence of hostile witnesses does not negate the sufficiency of evidence supporting a conviction when corroborated by other credible testimonies.
The court may suspend a sentence pending appeal if circumstances warrant, particularly considering the delay in hearing the appeal and the accused's custody status.
Suspension of sentence justified due to delays in appeal process and circumstances surrounding eyewitness testimonies.
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
