Back
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
MR. JUSTICE SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR, MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR SHARMA, JJ
AJAY KUMAR – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF RAJASTHAN – Respondent
ORDER :
This Suspension of Sentence Application has been moved by the convict-applicant who has suffered the sentence of life imprisonment under section 302 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code; co-accused Aman was found juvenile and his trial was separated.
2. On the basis of written report of Harendra Singh, a crime report no. 158 of 2017 was registered and the present convict-applicant and co-accused Aman were sent up for trial.
3. In the trial, the prosecution examined thirteen witnesses out of whom PW-3 Bhagwanti was projected as an eye-witness. However, while tendering evidence in the Court, PW-3 did not support the prosecution and she was declared hostile at the instance of the prosecution.
4. This Suspension of Sentence Application has been opposed by Mr. Deepak Choudhary, the learned Additional Advocate General and Mr. Umesh Kant Vyas, the learned counsel appearing for the informant.
5. Mr. Umesh Kant Vyas, the learned counsel for the informant has taken us through the scientific evidence brought on record which would indicate that the blood-stained shirt carried the same blood as of the deceased-Ajindrapal Singh.
6. However, having regard to the period of custody under
The court may suspend a life sentence based on the duration of custody and circumstances of the case, even when evidence against the convict exists.
The failure of the victim to identify the convict-applicant is significant for considering bail suspension, highlighting the court's discretion in such matters.
The court may suspend a convict's sentence post-conviction based on custody duration and evidence merits, despite diminished presumption of innocence.
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.
Suspension of sentence justified due to delays in appeal process and circumstances surrounding eyewitness testimonies.
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.
The court has the discretion to suspend the substantive sentence under Sec. 389 Cr.P.C. considering the totality of facts and circumstances, including the custody period and the anticipated delay in ....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
