Back
2025 Supreme(RAJ) 13
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JAIPUR BENCH)
MR. JUSTICE INDERJEET SINGH, MR. JUSTICE PRAMIL KUMAR MATHUR, JJ
DHARA SINGH S/O VIKRAM SINGH – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF RAJASTHAN – Respondent
SOSA / 297 / 2025
Important Points
Subject
Criminal Law - Appeals and Bail
Act Referred
Headnote
Facts of the case:
The accused-applicants were convicted under Section 302/149 of IPC, sentenced to life imprisonment, and have been in custody since arrest. They argue that they have been falsely implicated and have served more than seven years.
Findings of Court:
The court decided to suspend the sentence considering the suspension of a similarly situated co-accused and the likelihood of prolonged appeal proceedings.
Issues: The main issue was whether the sentence of the accused-applicants should be suspended pending the appeal, given the circumstances of their conviction and custody duration.
Ratio Decidendi: The court determined that it was appropriate to suspend the sentence to ensure justice, especially in light of the co-accused's sentence suspension and the expected delay in appeal resolution.
Result: Suspension of sentence application allowed; accused-applicants' sentence suspended during appeal.
Mr. Satish Kumar Khandal, Mr. Rajesh Choudhary, GA-cum-AAG, Mr. Gaurav Gupta, AAAG, Mr. Aman Kumar, AAAG
ORDER :
1. This suspension of sentence application has been filed by the present accused-applicants along with the appeal.
2. Counsel appearing on behalf of the accused-applicants submits that the accused-applicants have been sentenced to undergo life imprisonment for the offence under Section 302 /149 of IPC .
3. Counsel for the accused-applicants have annexed the certificate under Rule 311 (3) of the Rajasthan High Court Rules to the effect that accused-applicants are in judicial custody since the date of arrest. Counsel further submits that the accused-applicants have been falsely implicated in this matter. Counsel further submits that the accused-applicants has served the sentence for a period of more than seven years. Counsel further submits that the accused-applicants have been convicted with the aid of Section 149 of IPC and the sentence of similarly situated co-accused person namely Ramveer has already been suspended by this Court. Counsel further submits that hearing/disposal of appeal is likely to take long time. Therefore, he prayed that sentence awarded to the accused-applicants may be suspended and the accused-applicants be released on bail during the pendency of the appeal.
4. Learned Government Advocate-cum-Additional Government Advocate opposed the present application for suspension of sentence.
5. We have heard counsel for the parties and perused the record.
6. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case and also considering the fact that the sentence of similarly situated co-accused person namely Ramveer has already been suspended by this Court and also considering the fact that hearing/disposal of appeal is likely to take long time, we deem it just and proper to suspend the sentence of the present accused-applicants during the pendency of the appeal.
7. In that view of the matter, this criminal miscellaneous suspension of sentence application is allowed and it is ordered that execution of sentence awarded to the accused-applicants shall remain suspended during the pendency of the criminal appeal and the accused-applicants be admitted to bail subject to satisfaction of the trial Court with the stipulation that the accused-applicants shall appear before this Court on 07.04.2025 and thereafter as and when called upon to do so.
8. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the concerned trial Court through e-mail/fax for necessary compliance.
