SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(RAJ) 877

HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JAIPUR BENCH)
MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR, J
RAKESH @ BAKRA S/O MADAN LAL – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF RAJASTHAN – Respondent
SOSR / 4 / 2025



Advocates:
Mr. Mukesh Kumar Saini, Adv. For Respondent: Mr. Jitendra Singh Rathore, PP

The court has the discretion to suspend a sentence if circumstances justify, such as the duration of custody and potential delays in the appeal process.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 379 - Suspension of sentence - The accused-applicant challenged the order affirming conviction for theft and sentencing of three years imprisonment and a fine of Rs.5,000 - The Appellate Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the trial court's decision. (Paras 1-2)

(B) Judicial Custody - The accused-applicant has been in custody since 04.10.2023 and was previously on bail during trial. (Paras 4-7)

(C) Suspension Criteria - The court deemed it just to suspend the sentence considering the time required for the revision petition to conclude, without commenting on the merits of the case. (Paras 7-8)

Facts of the case:
The accused-applicant was convicted for theft and sentenced to three years imprisonment and a fine. The appeal against this conviction was dismissed.

Findings of Court:
The court found it appropriate to suspend the sentence, allowing the accused-applicant to remain free pending the outcome of the revision petition.

Issues: The main issue was whether to suspend the sentence given the circumstances of the accused-applicant's custody and previous bail status.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that considering the judicial custody duration and the likelihood of delay in the revision petition, suspending the sentence was just.

Result: Application for suspension of sentence allowed.

Order :

1. The present application for suspension of sentence has been filed by the accused-applicant under Section 528 of B.N.S.S. challenging the order dated 07.11.2024 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge No.11, Jaipur Metropolitan-I, Headquarter Sanganer (hereinafter referred to as the 'Appellate Court') in Criminal Appeal No.44/2024 whereby, learned Appellate Court while dismissing the appeal filed on behalf of the accused- applicant, affirmed the conviction vide order dated 06.02.2024 passed by Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate No.17, Jaipur Metropolitan-I, Headquarter Sanganer (hereinafter referred to as the 'trial Court') in Regular Criminal Case No.2637/2023 by which the accused-applicant was convicted for the offence punishable under Section 379 of IPC and was sentenced for three years simple imprisonment with a fine of Rs.5,000/-.

2. Feeling aggrieved of the orders dated 07.11.2024 and 06.02.2024, the present application for suspension has been filed by the accused-applicant.

3. Learned counsel for the accused-applicant submitted that the accused-applicant has been convicted by the trial Court by wrongly appreciating the evidence placed on record and the appeal filed by the accused-applicant has also been dismissed by the Appellate Court.

4. Learned counsel for the accused-applicant also contended that the accused-applicant is confined in Central Jail, Jaipur since 04.10.2023. Learned counsel for the accused-applicant further contended that the accused-applicant was on bail during trial and the revision petition will take time to conclude, therefore, the present application filed on behalf of the accused-applicant be allowed and his sentence be suspended.

5. Learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the prayer made on behalf of the accused-applicant.

6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the fact that the accused-applicant is in judicial custody since 04.10.2023 and also the fact that the accused- applicant was on bail during trial and the decision of the revision petition is likely to take time, but without commenting upon the merits of the case, this Court deems it just and proper to suspend the sentence awarded to the accused-applicant.

8. Accordingly, the application for suspension of sentence is allowed and it is ordered that the sentence awarded vide orders dated 07.11.2024 and 06.02.2024 to the accused-applicant namely, Rakesh @ Bakra S/o Madan Lal in the matter shall remain suspended during pendency of petition, provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- along with two sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court with the stipulation that he shall appear before this court on 06.03.2025 and thereafter as and when called upon to do so.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top