Smt Mali Devi vs State on 17 August, 2017

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Suspension Of Sentence(Appeal) No. 703 / 2017
Smt. Mali Devi W/o Dhokalram, By Caste Jat, Resident of Charlai
Kalla, Police Station Kalyanpur, Tehsil Pachpadra, District Barmer
(Raj.) (Presently Lodged in District Jail, Nagaur)

—-Appellant
Versus
The State of Rajasthan

—-Respondent
__
For Appellant(s) : Mr. K.S.Lodha
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rajesh Bhati, P.P.
__
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA
Judgment / Order
17/08/2017

Heard learned counsel for the applicant appellant and

learned Public Prosecutor on application for suspension of

sentence.

The instant application for S.O.S. has been moved on behalf

of appellant Mali Devi who stands convicted by learned Addl.

Sessions Judge, Balotra under Sections 304B 498A IPC and

sentenced to seven years R.I. for the offence under Section 304B

and one year’s R.I. for the offence under Section 498A IPC.

Learned counsel Mr. Lodha urges that the appellant is the

mother in law of the deceased Bhikhi Devi who committed suicide

in the matrimonial home on 8.9.2014. He points out that in the

first round of investigation, none of the witnesses including Akha

Ram father of the deceased, Babu Ram her uncle and Lehro Devi

her mother stated that the appellant was in any manner
(2 of 4)
[SOSA-703/2017]

responsible for the alleged harassment meted out to the deceased

on account of demand of dowry. He urges that the I.O. P.W. 17

Amrit Lal was the C.O. Balotra at the relevant point of time. He

admitted that witnesses examined by him in the first round of

investigation made no allegation against the appellant herein. He

urges that case of the appellant if examined with reference to the

statements of the prosecution witnesses is apparently

distinguishable from that of the co-accused Mohan Ram (husband

of the deceased) and Dhokal Ram, husband of the present

appellant (father in law of the deceased). He further submits that

the appellant being a woman was on bail during the course of trial

and since her name was involved as an accused in this case by

way of subsequent improved statements of the witnesses, the

sentences awarded to the appellant deserve to be suspended

during pendency of the appeal.

Learned P.P. opposed the submissions advanced by the

learned counsel for the applicant appellant. However, he too does

not dispute the fact that in the first round of investigation

conducted by the C.O. Amrit Lal material prosecution witnesses

including the parents of the deceased specifically attributed the

allegation of harassment and humiliation meted out to her on

account of demand of dowry to the accused Mohanram and Dhokal

Ram. The applicant appellant’s name was introduced in the

improved subsequent statements of the prosecution witnesses.

In this background and having regard to the over all facts

and circumstances of the case as reflected from record, this Court
(3 of 4)
[SOSA-703/2017]

is of the opinion that it is a fit case for suspending the sentences

awarded to the accused applicant.

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, Balotra,

vide judgment dated 29.6.2017 in Sessions Case No.5/2016

against the applicant appellant Smt. Mali Devi, shall remain

suspended till final disposal of the aforesaid appeal and she shall

be released on bail, provided she 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 her appearance in this

court on 18.9.2017 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
(4 of 4)
[SOSA-703/2017]

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 *