Rajasthan High Court – Jodhpur
Kohalnath vs State Of Rajasthan on 14 July, 2025
Author: Farjand Ali
Bench: Farjand Ali
[2025:RJ-JD:30661]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc Suspension of Sentence Application
No.1134/2025
IN
S.B. Criminal Appeal (Sb) No. 1345/2025
1. Kohalnath S/o Parasnath, Aged About 37 Years, R/o
Gehun Presently Ramnagar Barmer (At Present Lodged In
Central Jail Jodhpur)
2. Bannanath Father/o Khanunath, Aged About 75 Years, R/
o Tilak Nagar Barmer (At Present Lodged In Central Jail
Jodhpur)
3. Khamishanath Father/o Jairamnath, Aged About 38 Years,
R/o Bhadru Police Thana Ramsar (At Present Lodged In
Central Jail Jodhpur)
4. Chandranath S/o Jairamnath, Aged About 32 Years, R/o
Siyani Police Thana Ramsar (At Present Lodged In Central
Jail Jodhpur)
5. Omnath S/o Bannanath, Aged About 39 Years, R/o Fogera
Presently Tilak Nagar Barmer (At Present Lodged In
Central Jail Jodhpur)
6. Bhannath S/o Bannanath, Aged About 35 Years, R/o
Fogera Police Thana Girab (At Present Lodged In Central
Jail Jodhpur)
7. Manshanath S/o Bannanath, Aged About 50 Years, R/o
Fogera Presently Tilak Nagar Barmer (At Present Lodged
In Central Jail Jodhpur)
8. Thakarnath S/o Pratapnath, Aged About 38 Years, R/o
Siyani Police Thana Ramsar (At Present Lodged In Central
Jail Jodhpur)
9. Mananath S/o Jairamnath, Aged About 30 Years, R/o
Bhadru Police Thana Ramsar (At Present Lodged In
Central Jail Jodhpur)
10. Lalnath S/o Pratapnath, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Siyani
Police Thana Ramsar District Barmer (At Present Lodged
In Central Jail Jodhpur)
----Appellants
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Surendra Bagmalani
For Respondent(s) : Mr. SS Rathore, Dy.G.A.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI
Order
14/07/2025
(Downloaded on 15/07/2025 at 09:41:12 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:30661] (2 of 4)
1. The instant application for suspension of sentence has been
moved on behalf of the applicants in the matter of judgment
dated 02.06.2025 passed by the learned Special Judge,
Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act, Barmer in Sessions Case No.221/2018 (CIS
No.23/2016) whereby they were convicted and sentenced to
suffer maximum imprisonment of five years’ S.I. under
Sections 333/149, 333 of the IPC and lesser punishment for
the other offences under Sections 332/149, 353, 355/149,
147 of the IPC.
2. It is contended on behalf of the applicants that the learned
trial Judge has not appreciated the correct, legal and factual
aspects of the matter and thus, reached at an erroneous
conclusion of guilt, therefore, the same is required to be
appreciated again by this court. Hearing of the appeal is likely
to take long time, therefore, the application for suspension of
sentence may be granted.
3. Per contra, learned public prosecutor has vehemently
opposed the prayer made on behalf of the accused-applicants
for releasing the appellants on application for suspension of
sentence.
4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the
material available on record.
5. Prima facie, this Court finds substance in the submission of
the learned counsel for the appellants that the evidence on
record suggests a colorable exercise of power by the police or
officers. It is further submitted that when the appellants
(Downloaded on 15/07/2025 at 09:41:12 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:30661] (3 of 4)
protested, they were booked in this false case. For the
purpose of ascertaining the true facts, a critical analysis of
the entire material is required to be undertaken by this Court,
being the first appellate Court by taking a resort of Section
386 of Cr.P.C.
6. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties
and looking to the totality of facts and circumstances of the
case, more particularly the facts/fact that and the hearing of
appeal is likely to take further more time and considering the
overall submissions while refraining from passing any
comments on the niceties of the matter and the defects of the
prosecution as the same may put an adverse effect on
hearing of the appeal, this Court is of the opinion that it is a
fit case for suspending the sentence awarded to the accused-
applicants.
7. Accordingly, the application for suspension of sentence filed
under Section 389 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the
sentence passed by learned trial Court, the details of which
are provided in the first para of this order, against the
appellant-applicants named above shall remain suspended till
final disposal of the aforesaid appeal and they shall be
released on bail 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 Judge
for their appearance in this court on 14.08.2025 and
whenever ordered to do so till the disposal of the appeal on
the conditions indicated below:-
(Downloaded on 15/07/2025 at 09:41:12 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:30661] (4 of 4)
(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 applicants change the place of
residence, they will give in writing their changed
address to the trial Court as well as to the counsel
in the High Court.
(3) Similarly, if the sureties change their
addresses, they will give in writing their changed
address to the trial Court.
8. The learned trial Court shall keep the record of attendance of
the accused-applicants in a separate file. Such file be
registered as Criminal Misc. Case related to original case in
which the accused-applicants was 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 said accused-applicants
do not appear before the trial court, the learned trial Judge
shall report the matter to the High Court for cancellation of
bail.
(FARJAND ALI),J
16-Samvedana/-
(Downloaded on 15/07/2025 at 09:41:12 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
[ad_1]
Source link