Mohit Pandey vs State on 2 August, 2017

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Suspension Of Sentence(Appeal) No. 653 / 2017
Mohit Pandey S/o Om Prakash, By Caste Brahmin, Resident of B-
86, Karni Nagar, Pawanpuri Bikaner. (At Present Lodged in Central
Jail, Bikaner).

—-Appellant
Versus
The State of Rajasthan

—-Respondent
__
For Appellant(s) : Mr. D.S.Rajvi
For Respondent(s) : Mr. L.R.Upadhyay, P.P. Mr. Manish Dadhich
__
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA
Order
02/08/2017

Heard learned counsel for the applicant appellant, learned

counsel for the complainant and learned Public Prosecutor on the

application for suspension of sentences. Perused the material

available on record.

Despite opportunity being provided, learned P.P. has not filed

any formal reply to the application for S.O.S. and urges that he

would be addressing the Court orally.

Applicant appellant stands convicted for the offences under

Section 498A and 304-B IPC vide judgment dated 9.6.2017

passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge (Women Atrocity Cases),

Bikaner.

Learned counsel Mr. Rajvi drew the Court’s attention to the

statement of father of the deceased P.W. 1 Shiv Narayan and

particularly his cross examination wherein the witness admitted
(2 of 3)
[SOSA-653/2017]

that the appellant had transferred a huge sum of Rs. 3.5 lacs to

the account of his wife Smt. Kusum i.e. the mother of the

deceased. The witness further admitted that when the deceased

Smriti committed suicide, she was having a balance of Rs.

7,11,781/- in the joint account with the applicant. The witness

Shilpi Vishnoi who was a common friend of the appellant as well

as the deceased was examined as P.W. 11 at the trial, and in her

cross examination she clearly admitted that deceased Smriti was

not having any financial problem and that she never made any

complaint regarding demand of dowry having been made by the

applicant-appellant. He thus urges that the appellant has strong

grounds to challenge the impugned judgment and thus he

deserves to be enlarged on bail.

Learned P.P. and the learned counsel for the complainant

have vehemently opposed the submissions advanced by the

learned counsel for the applicant appellant.

In view of the above circumstances and considering the fact

that hearing of appeal is likely to consume time and as the

appellant appears to be having a strong grounds to challenge, I

am of the firm opinion that there exist valid reasons to suspend

the sentences awarded to the accused appellant.

Accordingly, the application for suspension of sentence filed

under Section 389 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the

sentences passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge (Women

Atrocity Cases), Bikaner, vide judgment dated 9.6.2017 in

Sessions Case No.67/2013 against the applicant-appellant Mohit

Pandey, shall remain suspended till final disposal of the aforesaid
(3 of 3)
[SOSA-653/2017]

appeal and he shall be released on bail, provided he executes a

personal bond in the sum of Rs.40,000/- with two sureties of

Rs.20,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for

his appearance in this court on 4.9.2017 and whenever ordered to

do so till the disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated

below:-

1. That he/she/they will appear before the trial
Court in the month of January of every year till the
appeal is decided.

2. That if the applicant(s) changes the place of
residence, he/she/they will give in writing
his/her/their changed address to the trial Court as
well as to the counsel in the High Court.

3. Similarly, if the sureties change their address(s),
they will give in writing their changed address to
the trial Court.

The learned trial Court shall keep the record of attendance of

the accused-applicant(s) in a separate file. Such file be registered

as Criminal Misc. Case related to original case in which the

accused-applicant(s) was/were 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 applicant(s) does not appear before the trial

court, the learned trial Judge shall report the matter to the High

Court for cancellation of bail.

(SANDEEP MEHTA)J.

/sushil/

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *