AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The learned counsel for the accused applicants submits that
finding of the learned trial court is erroneous because in the first
statement (Ex.D/8) of deceased Smt. Patasi Devi recorded by
Shyam Singh, SI of Police Station, Dangiyawas no allegations
were levelled by deceased against any accused applicants, who
were charge-sheeted. Thereafter, another statement (Ex.P/1)
was recorded on 19.8.2009 in which a specific allegation was
levelled against accused applicants that they poured kerosene
upon her and lit fire and subsequently, in the statement to the
Judicial Magistrate No.1, Jodhpur (Ex.P/7) the allegations were
levelled by the deceased for commission of offence, but both the
subsequent statements (Ex.P/1) recorded on 19.8.2009 by the
SHO Police Station, Dangiyawas and dying declaration (Ex.P/7),
different story was narrated by the deceased after meeting her
parents. Therefore, the subsequent statements were required to
be ignored by the learned trial court because in first statement
recorded by DW-4 Shyam Singh no allegations were levelled by
the deceased Patasi Devi against accused applicants, therefore,
the finding of the learned trial court relying upon subsequent
statement of the deceased deserves to be rejected. It is also
stated that names of applicants Om Prakash and Ramkanwari are
not mentioned in the statement (Ex.P/7) recorded by the
Magistrate. Further, it is submitted that during trial, applicants
were on bail, therefore the sentence awarded to them may kindly
be suspended.
Learned Public Prosecutor as well as the learned counsel
appearing for the complainant submits that the statement
(Ex.D/8) recorded by DW-4 have been rightly ignored by the
learned trial court because as per statement of DW-4 Shyam
Singh he was not even authorized to record the statement, so
also, in the statement recorded by the Magistrate (Ex.P/7) it is
specifically stated by the deceased that at the time of admitting
her in the hospital, the husband gave threat to her that whatever
I will say, you should inform the police, therefore, the learned trial
court has rightly relied upon the dying declaration and statement
recorded by the SHO Police Station, Dangiyawas upon which FIR
was registered. Therefore, this application for suspension of
sentence may kindly be rejected.
After considering the prayer and finding of the learned trial
court, without expressing any opinion, the application for
suspension of sentence of the accused applicant (i) Bhinya Ram @
Bhappa Ram S/o Meera Ram, (ii) Smt. Sohani @ Soni W/o Bhappa
Ram, (iii) Chaina Ram S/o Bhappa Ram and (iv) Dhanna Ram S/o
Bhinya Ram is hereby rejected.
However, the application for suspension of sentence filed on
behalf of (i) Om Prakash S/o Bhinya Ram and (ii) Ramkanwari D/o
Bhinya Ram deserves to be accepted.
5.S Consequently, application for suspension of sentence filed on
behalf of (i) Om Prakash S/o Bhinya Ram and (ii) Ramkanwari D/o
Bhinya Ram is hereby allowed and it is ordered that the sentence
awarded by learned Addl. Sessions Judge, (Women Atrocities
Cases), Jodhpur Metropolitan, Jodhpur vide its judgment dated
21.11.2016 in Sessions Case No.107/2013 (NCV No.797/2014)
against the accused-appellants-applicants (i) Om Prakash S/o
Bhinya Ram and (ii) Ramkanwari D/o Bhinya Ram shall remain
suspended till the final disposal of appeal preferred by them and
they may be released on bail provided they execute personal
bonds in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only)
each along with two sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees
twenty Five thousand only) each to the satisfaction of the trial
court for their appearance in this Court on 6.2.2017 and whenever
called upon to do so. A copy of this order may be sent to the
Superintendent, Central Jail, Jodhpur
