Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2025 DAILYLAW 33555 (RAJ)

RATAN HAMRAM S/O MAJIPUR v. STATE OF RAJASTAHN

SOSA/2183/2024 · 2025-04-02

Inderjeet Singh, Mukesh Rajpurohit

Criminal Appealbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2025:RJ-JP:14839-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application No. 2183/2024 IN D.B. Criminal Appeal No.427/2024 Ratan Hamram S/o Majipur, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Mission Babupur Jamdanga Thana Gajol, District Malda West Bengal Plaster Mistri At Gokul Vatika Aavasiya Yojna Vaishal Estate, Gandhi Path West, Police Station Bhankrota Jaipur Presently At Jaipur Central Jail, Jaipur ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajastahn, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Naman Pareek For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vivek Sharma, Adl. G.A Mr. Aman Kumar, AAAG Ms. Neha Goyal HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJEET SINGH HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUKESH RAJPUROHIT Judgment 02/04/2025 Heard on the suspension of sentence application. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the accused- applicant has been falsely implicated in this matter. He further submits that the case rests on circumstantial evidence and one of the recovery witness has not been examined by the prosecution during trial. Learned Government Advocate has opposed the suspension of sentence application and submits that the deceased (wife of the [2025:RJ-JP:14839-DB] (2 of 2) [SOSA-2183/2024] applicant) died while staying in the room with her husband (applicant) and according to post-mortem report the deceased died due to head injury. He further submits that during investigation one blood stained iron rod was recovered at the instance of the applicant and according to the FSL report human blood was found on the clothes of the applicant. Considering the facts and circumstances of the present case and also considering the recovery weapon of iron rod (Ex.P-10) as well as FSL report (Ex.P-51 & 52) and looking to the seriousness of the offence(s) against the applicant, in our view, no case is made out for allowing this application for suspension of sentence. Hence, this suspension of sentence application is dismissed. (MUKESH RAJPUROHIT),J (INDERJEET SINGH),J DIKSHA MISHRA /48