HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JAIPUR BENCH)
Mr. Justice Inderjeet Singh, Mr. Justice Pramil Kumar Mathur, JJ
Pappulal S/O Rampratap - Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan - Respondent
SOSA / 2330 / 2024
Decided On : 07-03-2025
(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 302 - Rajasthan High Court Rules - Rule 311(3) - Conviction and sentence to life imprisonment for murder - Eyewitness testimony questioned, with one eyewitness declaring hostile - Accused-applicants in judicial custody, seeking suspension of sentence pending appeal - Court found it just to suspend sentence due to lengthy appeal process. (Paras 2, 3, 4, 6, 7)
(B) Bail - Considerations for granting bail during appeal - The court emphasized the importance of the circumstances surrounding the case and the rights of the accused-applicants, given the delay in hearing the appeal. (Paras 6, 7)
Facts of the case:
The accused-applicants were convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment for murder. Eyewitness PW-5 admitted to arriving at the scene after the deceased had died, and another eyewitness was declared hostile.
Findings of Court:
The court deemed it just to suspend the execution of the sentence during the appeal process, allowing the accused-applicants to be released on bail.
Issues: The main issues were the credibility of eyewitness testimony and the appropriateness of suspending the sentence given the lengthy appeal process.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the circumstances of the case warranted the suspension of the sentence, considering the delay in the appeal process and the judicial custody of the accused-applicants.
Result: Criminal miscellaneous suspension of sentence application allowed.
ORDER :
1. These suspension of sentence applications have been filed by the accused-applicants along with the appeal(s).
2. Counsels appearing on behalf of the accused-applicants submit that the accused-applicants have been convicted and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment for the offence under Section 302 of IPC read with Section 149 thereof.
3. Counsels for the accused-applicants have annexed the certificate(s) under Rule 311 (3) of the Rajasthan High Court Rules to the effect that accused-applicants are in judicial custody. Counsels further submit that eyewitness-PW5, who is wife of the deceased, has admitted in her cross-examination that when she reached at the spot on motorcycle along with her son, the deceased had already died and the body of the deceased was lying there. Counsels further submit that another eyewitness namely Budhi Prakash has been declared hostile by the Trial Court. Counsels further submit that all the applicants were on bail during trial and the appeal(s) is not likely to be heard in near future. Therefore, they prayed that sentence awarded to the accused- applicants may be suspended and the accused-applicants be released on bail during the pendency of the appeal(s).
4. Learned Additional Government Advocate assisted by counsel for the complainant opposed the present application for suspension of sentence.
5. We have heard counsel for the parties and perused the record.
6. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case, and also the statement of eyewitnesses i.e. PW-5 and PW- Bhudhi Prakash and also considering the fact that hearing/disposal of appeal(s) is likely to take long time, we deem it just and proper to allow this criminal miscellaneous suspension of sentence application.
7. In that view of the matter, this criminal miscellaneous suspension of sentence application is allowed and it is ordered that execution of sentence awarded to the accused-applicant shall remain suspended during the pendency of the criminal appeal and the accused-applicant be admitted to bail subject to satisfaction of the trial Court with the stipulation that the accused-applicant shall appear before this Court on 15.04.2024 and thereafter as and when called upon to do so.
8. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the concerned trial Court through e-mail/fax for necessary compliance.
9. Copy of this order be separately placed in each connected file.
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.
The court can suspend a sentence during the appeal process if justified by circumstances such as the duration of custody and similar cases.
The court allows suspension of sentence for a juvenile convicted under Section 302 IPC, emphasizing the reliance on circumstantial evidence and the lengthy appeal process.
The court allowed the suspension of sentence for accused-applicants pending appeal, emphasizing their prior bail status and involvement of a co-accused.
Suspension of sentence is justified when the accused shows circumstances such as prior bail status, marriage to the prosecutrix, and delays in FIR filing, indicating a potential for prolonged appeal.
Suspension of sentence is justified when accused are on bail during trial, and cases involve complexities requiring prolonged appeal processes.
Suspension of sentence is justified when the appeal process is delayed significantly and key witness credibility is in question.
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.