DHARAMRAJ Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Vide judgment dtd. 16/8/2018 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Shahpura, District Bhilwara in Sessions Case No.53/2009 (32/2007)(125/2007), the appellant-application has been convicted for offences punishable under Ss. 147, 447, 325/149, 323/149 of IPC and sentenced to maximum punishment for three years SI.

(2.) Dr. Sachin Acharya, learned Senior Counsel for the appellant-applicant assisted by Mr. Ashok Khilery and Mr. Zeeshan Ali, submits that the appellant along with other accused persons filed a criminal appeal (No.964/2018), challenging their conviction and sentence. By order dtd. 5/9/2018, the appeal has been admitted and application for suspension of execution of sentence, filed on behalf of the applicant appellant has already been accepted and the execution of sentence has been suspended during pendency of the appeal. Dr. Acharya submits that presently, the appellant is working on the post of Additional Commissioner in Indian Revenue Services and posted at Kolkata. Since the present appeal is pending, the Department has initiated disciplinary proceedings in relation to the present matter, against him. Learned counsel argues that since disciplinary proceedings are pending against the appellant, the appellant prefers the present petition seeking stay on conviction as the Department may take any coercive action against the appellant on the basis of pendency of the present criminal appeal. He further submits that during pendency of the present petition, by order dtd. 13/4/2026 passed by Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, Govt. of India, the appellant-applicant has been put under suspension with immediate effect.

(3.) Learned Senior Counsel Dr. Acharya submits that at the time of alleged incident, the applicant was a very young boy of only 19 years and preparing for UPSC examination. During trial, the appellant was selected for Indian Revenue Services. He contends that during trial, on an application under Sec. 319 Cr.P.C., the appellant-applicant was arraigned as an additional accused in the present case. He contends that cognizance was taken against the appellant-applicant after more than four years of alleged crime on 17/12/2011 after he had cleared his UPSC examination in July, 2011. Learned Senior Counsel Dr. Acharya submits that the appellant has no other criminal antecedents and has not been found involved in any other criminal case except the present one. He argues that hearing of the appeal is not likely in near future. The appellant is under apprehension that the Department may take further coercive action and at culmiation of disciplinary proceedings, may remove him from service which would cause him irreparable loss. He also contends that the alleged offences do not involve moral turpitude. He thus, prays that the instant stay petition may be accepted. In support of his contentions, learned Senior Counsel has relied upon following judgments:-