HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
S.B. Suspension Of Sentence(Appeal) No. 1136 / 2017
Mahendra S/o Shri Kalu Lal Choudhary, R/o- Thokar Choraha,
Udaipur. (Presently Lodged in Central Jail, Udaipur).
The State of Rajasthan
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Pradeep Shah.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rajesh Bhati, Public Prosecutor.
For Complainant(s): Mr. Pankaj Gupta.
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE P.K. LOHRA
Heard learned counsel for the appellant as well as learned
Public Prosecutor on the application for suspension of sentence.
By the instant application under Section 389 Cr.P.C.,
applicant-appellant has craved for suspending the sentence
handed down by Additional Sessions Judge (Women Atrocities
Cases), Udaipur (for short, ‘learned trial Court’), by its verdict
dated 08.11.2017. Learned trial Court, by the aforesaid verdict,
while acquitting applicant-appellant for offence under Section 302
IPC, convicted him for offence under Section 304B IPC and handed
down sentence of ten years’ rigorous imprisonment and for
offence under Section 498A IPC two years’ rigorous imprisonment
with fine of Rs.5,000/-, and in default of payment of fine to further
undergo three months’ simple imprisonment.
(2 of 4)
It is argued by learned counsel that during trial appellant-
applicant was on bail. It is further submitted by learned counsel
that FIR itself was lodged after six days from the date of death of
deceased Ms. Manisha. Learned counsel further submits that
learned trial Court has not examined the evidence in right
perspective, more particularly, the allegations about perpetrating
cruelty on the deceased for demand of dowry or any valuable
security just before death. While referring to statements of PW3
Chadrakanta, mother of deceased, learned counsel submits that
she has admitted in clear and unequivocal terms that at the time
of marriage, there was no demand of dowry by the appellant-
applicant or his family members and furthermore his daughter has
never complained against the appellant-applicant or his family
members for demand of dowry and her only complaint was about
their behaviour. Learned counsel has also referred statements of
PW4 Anant Kumar, I.O., and submits that a cumulative reading of
his statements also makes it abundantly clear that offence under
learned counsel has argued that sentence awarded by the learned
trial Court may be suspended.
Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the
application for suspension of sentence.
Learned counsel for the complainant, Mr. Pankaj Gupta, has
strenuously urged that there was evidence available to show
demand of dowry and harassment, therefore, learned trial Court
has rightly indicted accused-applicant for offence under Section
(3 of 4)
I have bestowed my consideration to the arguments
advanced at the Bar and perused the impugned order and also
scanned materials available on record.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and
considering the sentence awarded, I feel inclined to accept this
application for suspension of sentence.
Accordingly, the application for suspension of sentence filed
sentences passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge (Women
Atrocities Cases), Udaipur, vide judgment dated 08.11.2017, in
Sessions Case No.184/2013, against appellant-applicant Mahendra
S/o Shri Kalu Lal Choudhary, shall remain suspended till final
disposal of the aforesaid appeal and he shall be released on bail,
provided he executes a personal bond in a sum of Rs.50,000/-
with two sureties of like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial
Judge for his appearance in this Court on 19.02.2018 and
whenever ordered to do so till disposal of the appeal, on the
conditions indicated below:-
1. That he will appear before the trial Court in the
month of January of every year till the appeal is
2. That if the applicant changes the place of
residence, he will give in writing his 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
accused-applicant in a separate file. Such file be registered as
(4 of 4)
Criminal Misc. Case related to original case in which the accused-
applicant 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 purposes relating to
pendency and disposal of cases in the trial court. In case the said
accused-applicant does not appear before the trial court, the
learned trial Judge shall report the matter to the High Court for
cancellation of bail.