VIJAY BISHNOI, MANOJ KUMAR VYAS
Hemant Kumar Meena @ Deepak Meena – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
ORDER
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties on D.B. Suspension of Sentence (Appeals) No.654/2021 and 538/2021.
2. Learned counsel for accused-appellants have submitted that the trial court has grossly erred in convicting and sentencing the appellants vide impugned judgment dated 24.03.2021. It is further submitted that there is no iota of evidence available on record to connect the appellants with the commission of crime. It has been argued that though the so called eye witnesses PW-11 and PW-12 have named the appellants but the Investigating Officer PW-31 (Kaptan Singh) in his evidence has specifically admitted that the accused-appellants were not known to the PW-11 and PW-12. The Investigating Officer PW-31 in his statement has also specifically stated that the appellants were not in connection with the deceased or his wife co-accused Heera Devi by any means such as mobile etc. and has also stated that the accused-appellants had no enmity with the deceased.
3. Learned counsel have, therefore, argued that when so called two eye witnesses PW-11 and PW-12 were not knowing the identity of appellants and in the absence of evidence of this fact that at any point of time before the inci
The court established that a conviction must be supported by credible evidence, and the lack thereof can lead to the suspension of a sentence.
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 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 and prolonged custody can justify the suspension of a sentence under Section 389 of the Cr.P.C.
A conviction must be based on credible and sufficient evidence; mere testimony without corroboration, especially after a significant delay, may not suffice to uphold a conviction.
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.
Circumstantial evidence alone may not suffice for conviction; direct evidence is crucial, and sentences can be suspended based on custody duration and appeal timelines.
Suspension of sentence imposed - Appellant was on bail during trial and he did not misuse his liberty of bail - Appeal is likely to take considerable time, application for suspension of sentence of c....
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.