Satyaprakash @ Sethi vs State of Rajasthan

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2023 Supreme(Raj) 1915

IN THE HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH
PANKAJ BHANDARI, BHUWAN GOYAL, JJ.
Satyaprakash @ Sethi - Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
D.B. Cri. Misc. (Suspension of Sentence) Application No.1284 of 2022 In D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 277 of 2022
Decided On : 07-02-2023

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellants : Mr. Krishan Kumar Chhawal.
For the State : Mr. Imran Khan, Dy. G.A.

Headnote:(A) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Sections related to suspension of sentence - Application for suspension based on circumstantial evidence, delay in FIR lodging, and acquittal of co-accused - The court considers reasonable grounds for suspension when the accused has been in custody for a prolonged period. (Paras 5-8)

(B) Criminal Procedure - The court’s determination involves assessment of pre-existing custody duration and procedural delays affecting case merits. (Paras 8)

Facts of the case:
The accused-appellant filed for suspension of sentence following a conviction based on circumstantial evidence. The appeal has remained pending while the accused has been in custody for over five years, and delays in the evidentiary process were noted. (Paras 5-8)

Findings of Court:
The application for suspension of sentence is granted, allowing the accused to remain out of custody upon compliance with bond conditions. (Paras 8-9)

Issues: Main issues include the validity of circumstantial evidence, the impact of delay in FIR filing on the case, and the implications of the co-accused's acquittal. (Paras 5-6)

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasizes that reasonable suspicion due to procedural delays and lengthy custody can lead to suspension of sentence, even without assessing case merits directly. (Paras 8)

Result: Application for suspension of sentence allowed.

Table of Content
1. procedural notices regarding appeal (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. court's consideration of arguments (Para 4 , 7 , 8)
3. arguments for and against suspension of sentence (Para 5 , 6)
4. order on suspension of sentence (Para 9)

ORDER :

It is informed by learned Deputy Government Advocate that victim has been intimated about filing of the criminal appeal as well as the application for suspension of sentence. Report in this regard has also been submitted before the Court, which is taken on record.

2. No one has put in appearance on behalf of the victim, despite information.

3. Accused-appellant has preferred this application for suspension of sentence.

4. Heard on application for suspension of sentence.

5. It is contended by the counsel for the appellant that the case rests upon circumstantial evidence. There is delay of more than 13 days in lodging of FIR. All the last seen witnesses have given statement after two days of the lodging of the FIR. It is also contended that co-accused who was tried by the Juvenile Court has been acquitted. The allegations levelled against the accused are akin to that of the co-accused. It is also contended that the applicant has remained in custody for a period of five year and seven months. Disposal of the appeal will take time.

6. Learned Deputy Government Advocate has opposed the application for suspension of sentence. It is contended by Deputy Government Advocate that all circumstances point towards the accused as accused has given statement under Section 27 and on his information the dead body was recovered.

7. We have considered the contention.

8. Considering the contentions put forth by counsel for the appellant and taking note of the fact that there is a delay of 13 days in lodging of the FIR, no one had initially stated that accused was seen together with the deceased, as also the fact that co-accused in this case has been acquitted by the Juvenile Court, accused has remain in custody for a period of five year and seven months, and disposal of appeal is bound to take time and without commenting on the merits of the case, we deem it proper to allow the suspension of sentence application.

9. Accordingly, the suspension of sentence application is allowed. It is ordered that the sentence awarded to accused appellant in Sessions Case No.03/2018 shall remain suspended if the appellant 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