MAHESH MEENA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RELYING on the cases of Angana & Anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan [(2009) 3 SCC 767], Takht Singh & Ors. Vs. State of M.P. [(2001) 10 SCC 463], Dara Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan [S.B. Cr. Misc. Second Bail (for Suspension of Sentence) Application No.9/2010, in S.B. Criminal Appeal No.575/2008, decided on 25.01.2011], Mr. Abdul Kalam Khan, the learned counsel for the appellant, has vehemently argued that in case the accused-appellant has served a substantial part of his sentence and in case the criminal appeal cannot be decided within the remaining period of the sentence, then the sentence of the accused-appellant should be suspended. According to him, the accused-appellant has already served more than five years out of the ten years of his sentence. Thus, he has undergone a substantial part of his sentence.

(2.) ON the other hand, Mrs. Alka Bhatnagar, the learned Public Prosecutor, has contended that even the cases referred by the learned counsel for the appellant do not lay down a universal principle. Therefore, each case would have to be decided on its own facts and circumstances.

(3.) ALLEGEDLY, the occurrence had taken place on 10.04.2005. The appellant was on bail from 05.12.2007 till 14.03.2008. During this period, the appellant did not violate the conditions of the bail. In fact, he lived as a peace loving, law abiding citizen. Therefore, the appellant did not pose a threat to the society at large. Moreover, the appellant has completed more than five years of incarceration. Thus, he has completed substantial part of his sentence.