Salim Mohammed and Another vs State of Rajasthan

Sandeep Mehta, J.—Heard learned Counsel for the Appellants and learned Public Prosecutor for the State.

Learned Counsel for the Appellants submits that the Appellants have been convicted and sentenced for the offences under Sections 3(1)(v) and Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. He further submits that for the offence u/s 3(1)(v), the Appellants have been sentenced to undergo two years'' imprisonment and for the offence u/s 3(1)(x), the Appellants have been sentenced to undergo one year''s simple imprisonment. Learned Counsel for the Appellants further submits that the very basis of the conviction and sentence is an unregistered document, which has no legal sanctity and creates no right, title in favour of the complainant. He further submits that learned court below has suspended the sentence awarded to the Appellants for a period of one month for filing appeal. During the trial, the Appellants were on bail and they have never misused the liberty of bail during the trial. Learned Counsel for the Appellant also submitted that the learned Special Judge has also directed the Appellants to hand-over the possession of the disputed plot to the complainant and his wife within a period of one month from the date of judgment, which direction, according to learned Counsel for the Appellants is per-se illegal because the document is an unregistered document, and on the basis of an unregistered document, such order cannot be passed.

Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application.

Having considered totality of facts and circumstances of the case, the application for suspension of sentence deserves acceptance, accordingly the same is allowed. The sentence passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Bhilwara by judgment dated 27.05.2011 in Sessions Case No. 56/2006 against the Appellants (1) Salim Mohammed S/o Noor Mohammed Neelgar and (2) Smt. Salma Bano W/o Salim Mohammed shall remain suspended till final disposal of the aforesaid appeal provided the Appellants execute(s) personal bond in the sum of Rs. 20,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court for their appearance before this Court on 15.07.2011 and whenever ordered to do so with the incorporation in the bond that in the event of change of his/her/their permanent address or of residence, the same shall be intimated to this Court at earliest.

So far as the contention raised by the learned Counsel for the Appellants with regard to directions given by the learned court below to hand-over the possession of the dispute plot to the complainant is concerned, this direction if at affects the Appellants, then the Appellants are at liberty to challenge the same by way of appropriate proceedings.