KUNJYA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The matter comes up for consideration of the application for suspension of sentence No. 651/2021 preferred on behalf of appellant-applicants, who have been convicted and sentenced by the trial court vide impugned judgment.

(2.) Learned counsel for the appellant-applicants has submitted that the trial court has grossly erred in convicting and sentencing the accused-appellants vide impugned judgment though the prosecution has failed to prove the charges against them, for which, they were put to trial. Learned counsel while inviting attention of this Court towards the statement of the alleged eyewitnesses has argued that all the eye-witnesses have not supported the prosecution case and turned hostile. It is further submitted that the trial court has recorded the finding that on the basis of circumstantial evidence, the appellant-applicants are found guilty for commission of the offences, however, a close look of the material as well as the evidence available on record clearly proves that the circumstantial evidence, on which, the trial court has relied upon are not sufficient to prove the guilt of the applicant-appellants. It is further submitted that during the course of trial, the accused-appellants were on bail. It is also submitted that there is no likelihood of hearing of the appeal preferred by the appellant-applicants in near future, in such circumstances, the application for suspension of sentence may be allowed.

(3.) Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the application for suspension of sentence preferred on behalf of the accused-appellants.