SURESH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant application for suspension is preferred by appellants-Suresh Son of Gordhan and Banwari Son of Gordhan in pending appeal filed aggrieved from order of conviction and sentence dtd. 31/5/2025 in Sessions Case No. 84/2017 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST(POA) Act cases, Baran whereby appellants were convicted for offence under Ss. 341, 323/34, 325/34, 307/34 and 504 IPC. The maximum sentence awarded to each of the appellant is 7 years.

(2.) Learned Counsel for the appellant while relying upon grounds of appeal submitted that for incident of 10/2/2016 the report was lodged on 12/2/2016 and that too without explaining reasons of dealy. He further submitted that a cross case was also registered against the complainant party and a copy of FIR Ex. D/2 indicate that cross FIR was registered on same day. He further referred Ex. D/3 site plan and sumitted that place of incident clearly indicate that the catties of complainant party entered into fields of appellant accused, but when stopped the complainant attacked them. He further referred injury report of Kasturchand (Ex. P/19), Nemi Chand (Ex. P/18), Satyanarayan (Ex. P/15) and Shantilal Ex. P/7 and submitted that all these injury reports were prepared by PW-5 Dr. Omprakash on 20/2/2016 means after 11th day of incident. He further referred statement of PW-5 Dr. Omprakash and submitted that he only examined post treatment injuries upon these injured including Shantilal. He further submitted that treating doctor or surgeon is not produced by prosecution to prove grievous injury upon Shantilal. He further submitted that without proving of Ex. P/9 learned Trial Court has read the document in support of prosecution to presume that the injury suffered by Shantilal is dangerous to life. He further referred cross-examination of PW-1, PW-10 and PW-11 and submitted that the Trial Court has ignored material discrepancies and contradictions while drawing conclusion against the appellants. At last, he submitted that the Trial Court has convicted these appellants with assistance of Sec. 34 IPC and these appellants were on bail during trial.

(3.) Aforesaid contentions were opposed by learned Public Prosecutor. He submitted custody certificate of both the accused along with intimation slip to complainant and same are taken on record.