PRAVEEN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant applicant herein stands convicted and sentenced as below vide judgment dated 08.04.2019 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, No.2, Abu Road, District Sirohi in Sessions Case No.67/2016 (06/2016): <IMG>JUDGEMENT_78_LAWS(RAJ)8_2021_1.jpg</IMG>

(2.) Learned counsel Shri S.S. Gour representing the applicant appellant urges that after rejection of the previous applications for suspension of sentences filed on behalf of the appellant, the application for suspension of sentences filed on behalf of the co- accused Pankaj Kumar (276/2021) has been accepted by this Court and that the case of the applicant appellant is in no manner distinguishable. It is rather contended that the evidence of the prosecution as against the appellant is weaker as compared to that in existence against the co-accused Pankaj Kumar. On this grounds, learned counsel Shri Gour craved indulgence of bail for the applicant appellant during pendency of the appeal.

(3.) Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor and the counsel representing the complainant have vehemently and fervently opposed the submissions advanced by the appellant's counsel and urged that it is a case of gruesome double blind murders and wholesome incriminating recoveries were effected from the appellant during the course of investigation and thus, he does not deserve indulgence of bail during pendency of appeal.