Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Laxman Lal and anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr.

Laxman Lal and anr. vs State of Rajasthan and anr.

Type Court Judgment Court Rajasthan Decided May 06, 2005
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/766876

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Rajasthan High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
S.B. Cr. Misc. IInd Stay Application No. 362 of 2002
Subject
Criminal

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

-

Key legal issue
Criminal

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Laxman Lal and anr.

Advocate Praveen Balwada, Adv.

Respondent

State of Rajasthan and anr.

Advocate Ashivin Sharma, Public Prosecutor

Legal References

Cases Referred
Ram Kishore v. State of Rajasthan
Reported In
RLW2006(1)Raj121; 2005WLC(Raj)UC718

Excerpt

- k.c. sharma, j.1. heard learned counsel for the parties.2. on 26.3.2002, this court while staying order conviction dated 30.10.2001 qua appellant om prakash kept pending the application of appellant laxman lal for disposal. it appears from the order dated 26.3.2002 that this court having found sufficient material as regards om prakash that department has issued notice to initiate disciplinary proceedings against him which may result into termination of his service, entertained the prayer for suspension of conviction as conviction being capable of execution and accordingly suspended the order of conviction in so far it relates to om prakash. however, since the services of laxman lal had already been terminated, his application was kept pending with a view to ascertain whether even after termination of service, order of conviction can still be stayed.3. learned counsel appearing for the appellant has produced before me two decisions of the division bench of this court, first in furquan ahmed and anr. v. state of rajasthan (db. cr. misc. stay application no. 772/2001 in db cr. appeal no. 660/2001) decided on 2.8.2001 and another in ram kishore v. state of rajasthan (d.b. cr. misc. application for stay of conviction no. 438/2005 in db cr. appeal no. 487/95, decided on 15.4.2004. in the first case, the division bench stayed the judgment of conviction qua appellant furquan ahmed, gr. iii teacher, who services had already been terminated. in the later case, the applicant had retired from service. the division bench considering the fact that applicant would not be paid even his pension, stay the conviction of the appellant.4. thus, relying upon above quoted two decisions of the division bench, i consider it appropriate to entertain the prayer for suspension of conviction.5. consequently, the order of conviction dated 31.10.2001 passed by the trial court in so that it relates to convict laxman lal shall remain suspended till the disposal of this criminal appeal.

Full Judgment

K.C. Sharma, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. On 26.3.2002, this court while staying order conviction dated 30.10.2001 qua appellant Om Prakash kept pending the application of appellant Laxman Lal for disposal. It appears from the order dated 26.3.2002 that this court having found sufficient material as regards Om Prakash that department has issued notice to initiate disciplinary proceedings against him which may result into termination of his service, entertained the prayer for suspension of conviction as conviction being capable of execution and accordingly suspended the order of conviction in so far it relates to Om Prakash. However, since the services of Laxman Lal had already been terminated, his application was kept pending with a view to ascertain whether even after termination of service, order of conviction can still be stayed.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant has produced before me two decisions of the Division Bench of this Court, first in Furquan Ahmed and Anr. v. State of Rajasthan (DB. Cr. Misc. Stay Application No. 772/2001 IN DB Cr. Appeal No. 660/2001) decided on 2.8.2001 and another in Ram Kishore v. State of Rajasthan (D.B. Cr. Misc. Application for stay of Conviction No. 438/2005 IN DB Cr. Appeal No. 487/95, decided on 15.4.2004. In the first case, the Division Bench stayed the judgment of conviction qua appellant Furquan Ahmed, Gr. III Teacher, who services had already been terminated. In the later case, the applicant had retired from service. The Division Bench considering the fact that applicant would not be paid even his pension, stay the conviction of the appellant.

4. Thus, relying upon above quoted two decisions of the Division Bench, I consider it appropriate to entertain the prayer for suspension of conviction.

5. Consequently, the order of conviction dated 31.10.2001 passed by the Trial Court in so that it relates to convict Laxman Lal shall remain suspended till the disposal of this criminal appeal.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial