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/