HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
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
The State of Rajasthan
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
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
passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge (Women Atrocity Cases),
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)
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
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)
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
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.