[2026:RJ-JP:6360-DB]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal)

No. 1075/2025 In D.B. Criminal Appeal No.241/2025 Deewan Singh Son Of Banay Singh, Aged About 48 Years, R/o Village Gajipur Police Station Nadbai District Bharatpur Rajasthan (At Present In Central Jail, Bharatpur)

----Accused/Appellant Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Harendra Singh Sinsinwar with Mr. Jaswant Singh Rathore For Respondent(s) : Mr. Naresh Gupta, PP with Ms. Neha Goyal Mr. Chandra Prakash Meena HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN

Order

11/02/2026 This suspension of sentence application under Section 430 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the accused-applicant (for brevity, “the applicant”) alongwith the appeal. The applicant has been convicted and sentenced by the learned Sessions Judge, Bharatpur (for short, ‘the learned trial Court’) vide judgment dated 09.05.2025 passed in Sessions Case No.17/2023 (CIS No.18/2023) as under:-

1. Under Section 302 IPC: Life imprisonment and fine of Rs.20,000/- in default whereof, one year additional simple imprisonment.

2. Under Section 201 IPC: Seven years rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs.10,000/- in default whereof, six months additional simple imprisonment.

Sentences to run concurrently.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that despite the material prosecution witnesses namely S/Shri Monu (PW1), Samay Singh (PW2), Niranjan Singh (PW3), Tej Singh (PW7) and Lekhraj Singh (PW8) turning hostile and not supporting the prosecution story, learned trial Court has erred in relying upon their testimony only on the premise that being relative of the applicant, they had a motive in turning hostile to save him. Inviting attention of this Court towards the testimony of Shri Ramavtar Meena (PW18), the Investigating Officer, he submits that he has admitted that there was no evidence on record to demonstrate that the scene of crime- a room in the house belonged to him. He further submits that group of the blood found on the only incriminating piece of evidence, i.e., shirt recovered at his instance remained inconclusive. Lastly, he submits that he was on bail during trial with no allegation of its misuse. He, therefore, prays that suspension of sentence application be allowed.

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor, assisted by learned counsel for the complainant, supporting the findings recorded by the learned trial Court, prayed for dismissal of the application.

Heard. Considered.

All the material witnesses, named hereinabove, have turned hostile and they have not supported the prosecution story. From the record, we find that the only incriminating piece of evidence recovered at the applicant’s instance is his blood stained shirt but, the blood grouping remained inconclusive. The testimony of Shri Ram Avtar Meena- the Investigating Officer, reflects that the prosecution has not established that the house, in which dead body was found, belonged to the applicant. He was on bail during trial with no allegation of its misuse. Hearing of appeal is likely to take time. In view thereof, we are inclined to allow the suspension of sentence application.

Resultantly, the suspension of sentence application is allowed. Substantive sentences awarded to the applicant by the learned trial Court vide judgment dated 09.05.2025 shall remain suspended during pendency of the appeal and the applicant- Deewan Singh Son Of Banay Singh shall be released on bail provided that he furnishes bail bonds to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court to the effect that he shall appear before this Court on or before 11.03.2026 and as and when called upon to do so till disposal of the appeal and subject to the following conditions:-

1. That he will appear before the learned trial Court in the month of January of every year till the appeal is decided.

2. That if the applicant chan