Ashu Ram vs State of Rajasthan - 2023 Supreme(Raj) 1887

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2023 Supreme(Raj) 1887

IN THE HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN
PANKAJ BHANDARI, BHUWAN GOYAL, JJ.
Ashu Ram - Accused-Applicant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
D.B. Criminal Misc. Suspension of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 342 of 2023 In D.B. Criminal Appeal No.370 of 2022
Decided On : 31-05-2023

Advocates Appeared:
For the Applicant : Mr. Ashvin Garg
For the State :Ms. Alka Bhatnagar, Addl. Govt. Advocate.

Headnote:(A) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Suspension of Sentence - Application for suspension of sentence allowed due to prolonged custody of 7 years & 7 months and pending appeal - Allegation against another individual not pursued by Police - Court emphasized the importance of timely disposal of appeals and considerations in granting bail. (Paras 5-8)

(B) Circumstantial Evidence - Case revolved around interpretation of circumstantial evidence; Police did not pursue charges against the initially accused party.

Facts of the case:
The accused-applicant has been in custody for over 7 years, facing allegations based on circumstantial evidence with another co-accused not charged.

Findings of Court:
The suspension of sentence was granted while requiring a personal bond and sureties for compliance.

Issues: The court assessed the implications of prolonged custody on the applicant's right to a timely trial and consideration of circumstantial evidence.

Ratio Decidendi: The court concluded it was appropriate to suspend the sentence without commenting on the case's merits, given the delay in appeal disposal.

Result: Application for suspension of sentence allowed.

Table of Content
1. suspension of sentence application initiated. (Para 1 , 2)
2. notification to complainant regarding appeal. (Para 3)
3. arguments for and against suspension. (Para 4 , 5)
4. consideration of custody duration and merits. (Para 6 , 7)
5. order for suspension of sentence issued. (Para 8)

ORDER :

Accused-applicant has preferred this application for suspension of sentence.

2. Heard on application for suspension of sentence.

3. It is informed by learned Additional Government Advocate that complainant has been intimated about filing of the criminal appeal as well as application for suspension of sentence. No one has put in appearance on behalf of the complainant, despite information. Report in this regard has also been submitted by learned State Counsel and the same is taken on record.

4. It is contended by counsel appearing for the accused-applicant that case rests upon circumstantial evidence. The allegation was against Kendra Singh but Police has not filed the charge-sheet against him. It is further contended that applicant has remained in custody for a period of 7 years & 7 months and disposal of appeal is bound to take time.

5. Learned Additional Government Advocate has opposed the application for suspension of sentence. It is contended that the dead body was recovered at the instance of the applicant.

6. We have considered the contentions.

7. Taking note of the facts that applicant has remained in custody for a period of 7 years & 7 months; that initially the allegation of pushing the deceased was against Kendra Singh, however Police has not filed the charge-sheet against him; that disposal of appeal is bound to take time, without commenting upon merits of the case, we deem it proper to allow the present application for suspension of sentence.

8. Accordingly, the present application for suspension of sentence is allowed. It is ordered that the sentence awarded to accused-applicant in Sessions Case No.08/2016 shall remain suspended if the accused-applicant furnishes a personal bond of Rs. 1,00,000/- and two sureties of Rs. 50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court to the effect that he shall appear before this Court as and when called upon to do so.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document