JAVED ALIAS ZAKIR SON OF SHREE ZBRAIL KHAN v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN
SOSA/2225/2024 · 2025-05-14
Ashok Kumar Jain
Criminal Appealbody2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 36808 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 36808 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2025:RJ-JP:20436] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 2225/2024 In S.B. Criminal Appeal No.2976/2024
1. Javed Alias Zakir Son Of Shree Zbrail Khan, Aged About 32 Years, R/o M.n. 37, Mohsinpura Devas, P.s. City Kotwali, Distt. Devas, Madhyapradesh.
2. Anees S/o Rahees, Aged About 38 Years, R/o M.n. Mohsinpura, Devas, P.s. City Kotwali, Distt. Devas, Madhyapradesh. (Appellant Confined In Centrail Jail Jaipur Raj). ----Petitioners Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vijendra Yadav For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vijay Singh Yadav, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN
Order 14/05/2025
1. The instant application for suspension of sentence is preferred by appellants-Javed Alias Zakir Son Of Shree Zbrail Khan and Anees S/o Rahees in pending appeal filed aggrieved from order of conviction and sentence dated 17.10.2024 in Sessions Case No.08/2014 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge No.1, Kotputli Dist. Jaipur whereby appellants were convicted for offence under Sections 3/8, 5/8 and 9 of Rajasthan Bovine Animal (Prohibition of Slaughter and Regulation of
[2025:RJ-JP:20436] (2 of 4) [SOSA-2225/2024] Temporary Migration or Export) Act, 1995 and sentenced accordingly.
2.
Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that appellants are innocent persons and they were falsely implicated by police on suspicion. He further submitted that allegation upon appellant Javed is that he was driver of vehicle whereas Anees was cleaner but no evidence is led about ownership of bovine animal allegedly transported in the vehicle. He further submitted that no independent witness was examined by prosecution to support the case of prosecution. He further submitted that identification and recovery was not proved beyond reasonable doubt and the trial court only on the basis of surmises and conjectures has convicted appellants. At last, he submitted that appellants were on bail during trial and disposal of appeal will take its own time. 3. Aforesaid contentions were opposed by learned Public Prosecutor. He submitted custody certificates along with criminal antecedents and same are taken on record. 4. Heard learned counsel for appellants and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the record. 5. On the basis of report Ex.P-7 about search and seizure of truck No. MP09-KD-9036 and recovery of bovine animal transported in contravention of the Rajasthan Bovine Animal (Prohibition of Slaughter and Regulation of Temporary Migration or Export) Act 1995, FIR No.143/2013 was registered at P.S. Paniyala, Jaipur Rural. After investigation, police has filed charge- sheet against appellants. The prosecution has examined 8 witnesses and exhibited 9 documents. The trial court has exhibited 4 documents. The accused were examined under Section 313
[2025:RJ-JP:20436] (3 of 4) [SOSA-2225/2024] Cr.P.C. and they have not submitted any defence evidence. Learned trial court has convicted appellants under Sections 3/8, 5/8 and 9 of the Rajasthan Bovine Animal (Prohibition of Slaughter and Regulation of Temporary Migration or Export) Act, 1995. The maximum sentence awarded to each of the appellant is 7 years. The appellants were on bail during trial and disposal of appeal will take its own time. Two other cases were registered against Jakir @ Javed under the Excise Act whereas one case was registered against Anees under the Gambling Act. 6. We have considered the cross-examination of witnesses as referred by learned counsel for appellants. The grounds and discrepancies as mentioned by learned counsel for appellants can be considered at the time final adjudication. At this stage, it is not possible for us to express any opinion on merits of the case, therefore, it is appropriate to release appellants on bail. 7.
Therefore, without expressing any opinion on merits, I am of considered view that it is a fit case wherein appellants can be enlarged on bail. The application under Section 430(1) B.N.S.S. is allowed and sentence of appellants accused-Javed Alias Zakir Son Of Shree Zbrail Khan and Anees S/o Rahees is suspended till disposal of appeal with the condition that each of them would 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 their appearance in this court on 27.08.2025 and whenever ordered to do so till the disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated below:-
1. After release of appellant on bail, they will not indulge in any criminal activity and if it is found
[2025:RJ-JP:20436] (4 of 4) [SOSA-2225/2024] that they are involved in any criminal activity, the
order shall be recalled.
2. That they will appear before the trial Court in the month of January of every year till the appeal is decided.
3. That if the applicant(s) changes the place of residence, they will give in writing their changed address to the trial Court as well as to the counsel in the High Court.
4. Similarly, if the sureties change their address(s),they will give in writing their changed address to the trial Court.
8. Misc. Application stands disposed of.
9. A copy of this order be sent to learned trial court through E- mail.
(ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J PREETI VALECHA /32