The court established that a conviction must be supported by credible evidence, and the absence of such evidence can lead to suspension of sentence.

ORDER

1. The matter comes up for consideration of the application for suspension of sentence No. 651/2021 preferred on behalf of appellant-applicants, who have been convicted and sentenced by the trial court vide impugned judgment.

2. Learned counsel for the appellant-applicants has submitted that the trial court has grossly erred in convicting and sentencing the accused-appellants vide impugned judgment though the prosecution has failed to prove the charges against them, for which, they were put to trial. Learned counsel while inviting attention of this Court towards the statement of the alleged eyewitnesses has argued that all the eye-witnesses have not supported the prosecution case and turned hostile. It is further submitted that the trial court has recorded the finding that on the basis of circumstantial evidence, the appellant-applicants are found guilty for commission of the offences, however, a close look of the material as well as the evidence available on record clearly proves that the circumstantial evidence, on which, the trial court has relied upon are not sufficient to prove the guilt of the applicant-appellants. It is further submitted that during the course of trial, the accused-appellants were on bail. It is also submitted that there is no likelihood of hearing of the appeal preferred by the appellant-applicants in near future, in such circumstances, the application for suspension of sentence may be allowed.

3. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the application for suspension of sentence preferred on behalf of the accused-appellants.

4. Having considered the totality of facts and circumstances of the case; after scrutinizing the record of the trial court; the prosecution evidence produced before the trial court, the material available on record; particularly taking into consideration the fact that all the main prosecution witnesses have turned hostile and not supported the prosecution story and keeping in view the fact that as the trial court itself has recorded that prosecution has failed to prove motive of the appellant-applicants for commission of the crime, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, we consider it just and proper to suspend the substantive sentence awarded to the accused-appellants.

5. Accordingly, the application for suspension of sentence No.651/2021 is allowed and it is ordered that the substantive sentences passed by the Special Judge, Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities Act) Cases, Jhalawar vide judgment dated 01.02.2021 in Sessions Case No.04/2016 against appellants- 1- Kunjya @ Kunj Bihari son of Mathura Lal, 2-Om Prakash alias Om Meena son of Siya Ram, 3-Yogendra son of Latoor Lal and 4-Bhooliya alias Dhanraj son of Loonkilal shall remain suspended till final disposal of the aforesaid appeal, provided each of them 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 court for their appearance in this court on 25.10.2021 and whenever ordered to do so, till the disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated below:-

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

2. That if the appellants change the place of residence, they will give in writing their changed address to the trial court as well as to their counsel in the High Court.

3. Similarly, if the sureties change their address, 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-appellants in a separate file. Such file be registered as Criminal Misc. Case related to original case in which the accused-appellants were 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