1 S.B.Cr.Misc. Bail App. No. 183/07 IN S.B.CRIMINAL REVISION NO. 699/2007 (Rampal Vs. State of Rajasthan) Date of order : 17/8/2007 HON'BLE MR.H.R.PANWAR, J. Mr. R.S.Chundawat for the petitioner. Mr. V.R.Mehta Public Prosecutor. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and public prosecutor for the State. Perused the judgment and order impugned passed by the appellate court as well as by the trial court and the record of the trial court. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the truck was plying on State Highway and it was on its correct side, whereas the motor cyclist came from side lane suddenly on the road and collided with the rear wheel of the truck. There are two witnesses namely PW-3 Shelendra Singh and PW-4 Mahaveer Pareek who stated that the truck hit the deceased from behind. The statement is in contradiction of the site map prepared by the police Ex.P-7, even witnesses stated that the deceased came underneath the rear wheel of the truck. Had the deceased been hit from behind, there was no reason for the deceased not having impact with the front wheel of the vehicle and therefore, according to learned counsel for the petitioner both the courts below fell in error in not considering 2 the material evidence in right perspective. In my view, there is an arguable law point involved in the instant revision petition. Admit. Issue notice. Mr. V.R.Mehta P.P. accepts notice on behalf of State. Heard learned counsel for the parties on the application for suspension of sentence. Having considered the totality of facts and circumstances of the case, looking to the short sentence and the fact that revision petition has already been admitted as also the fact that it is the case of the prosecution that the truck was plying on State Highway, whereas the deceased came from side lane and collided with the rear wheel of the truck, without commenting on the merit of the case which may prejudice the case of either party at the time of hearing of the revision, I think it just and proper to suspend the substantive sentence of imprisonment awarded to the accused petitioner-applicant. Accordingly, the bail application filed under Sec. 397/401 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the substantive sentence of imprisonment passed by the trial court and affirmed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, No.2, Bhilwara Camp Shahpura vide judgment dt. 13.7.2007 in Criminal Appeal No. 78/2005 against petitioner-applicant Ram Pal S/o Devi Lal shall remain suspended till final disposal of the aforesaid revision provided he executes a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 20,000/- 3 with two sureties of Rs.10,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for his appearance before this court on 18/9/2007 and whenever ordered to do so with the incorporation in the bond that as and when he will shift his place of residence, he will intimate to this Court and his lawyer about his new place of residence. (H.R.PANWAR),J. rp