HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
S.B. Suspension Of Sentence(Appeal) No. 173 / 2018
S.B. Criminal Appeal No.2108/2017
Bishna Ram S/o Sh. Asu Ram, Aged About 23 Years, By Caste
Meghwal, Resident of Ward No. 1, Deshnok, District Bikaner (Raj.)
(Presently Lodged in Central Jail, Bikaner)
The State of Rajasthan
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Vineet Jain
For Respondent(s) : Mr. R.K. Bohra, P.P., for the State
For Complainant : Mr. D.D. Chitlangi
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE P.K. LOHRA
Applicant-appellant Bishna Ram has laid this application
under Section 389 Cr.P.C. craving for suspension of sentence
handed down by learned trial Court by its judgment dated
05.12.2017. Learned trial Court by the impugned judgment has
convicted appellant for offence under Sections 498A and 306 IPC.
It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that during
trial applicant was on bail. It is also submitted by learned counsel
for the applicant that prima facie requisite ingredients for
(2 of 3)
constituting offence under Section 306 IPC are conspicuously
missing in the matter and learned trial Court has seriously erred in
castigating the applicant for abetment of suicide. While referring
to the statements of parents of deceased P.W.3 and P.W.7, learned
counsel has argued that a cumulative reading of the statements of
both the witnesses sufficiently demonstrates that there was no
question of any abetment by the appellant wherein a situation has
arisen so as to compel deceased Ms. Suman to commit suicide.
With these arguments, learned counsel has craved for suspending
the sentence awarded by the learned trial Court.
Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the
application for suspension of sentence.
Learned counsel for the complainant, while reiterating the
arguments of the learned Public Prosecutor, submits that in the
backdrop of proven criminal delinquencies of the applicant, he is
not entitled for suspension of sentence.
I have bestowed my consideration to the arguments
advanced by rival parties, perused the impugned judgment and
also examined the record of the case.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I
feel inclined to accept this application for suspension of sentence.
Accordingly, the application for suspension of sentence filed
under Section 389 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the
sentence passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge (Women
Atrocities Cases), Bikaner, vide judgment dated 05.12.2017, in
Sessions Case No.117/2013 against appellant-applicant, Bishna
(3 of 3)
Ram S/o Sh. Asu Ram, shall remain suspended till final disposal of
the aforesaid appeal and he shall be released on bail, provided he
executes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two
sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial
Judge for his appearance in this Court on 23.03.2018 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 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
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.