HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JAIPUR BENCH)
MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL,
CHANDRA PRAKASH SHRIMALI
SMT. SEEMA W/O RAMRATAN – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF RAJASTHAN – Respondent
SOSA / 2429 / 2025
##PAGE1##
[2026:RJ-JP:4098-DB]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
D.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal)
No. 2429/2025
Smt. Seema W/o Ramratan, Aged About 30 Years, R/o
Padampura Road, Village Makadwali, Police Station Christian
Ganj, Ajmer. (At Present Confined In Central Jail Ajmer)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor.
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vinay Pal Yadav
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Naresh Kumar Gupta, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SHRIMALI
Order
29/01/2026
Custody certificate submitted by the learned Public
Prosecutor is taken on record.
The accused-applicant (for short, ‘the applicant’) has been
convicted and sentenced by the learned Additional Sessions Judge
No.2, Ajmer (for short, ‘learned trial Court’) vide judgment dated
14.11.2025 as under:
5. Under Section 302/34 IPC: Life imprisonment and fine of
Rs. 20,000/- in default thereof, one year simple imprisonment.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the allegation
against her is of inflicting injuries on the body of deceased-Shivraj
with Dantli (a curved sharp edged weapon) but, as per the post-
mortem report (Ex-P-26), there is no corresponding injury and the
fatal injuries i.e., lacerated wounds on his skull, have been
(Uploaded on 29/01/2026 at 07:25:37 PM)
(Downloaded on 15/02/2026 at 07:25:28 AM)
##PAGE2##[2026:RJ-JP:4098-DB] (2 of 3) [SOSA-2429/2025]
attributed to co-accused. He submits that she was on bail during
trial and is in custody for a period of two months 18 days and
prays for her suspension of sentence.
Per contra learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently
opposed the application.
Heard. Considered.
It is evident that the allegation against the applicant is of
inflicting injuries on the body of the deceased with a sharp edged
weapon but, there is no corresponding injury on his body rather,
as per post-mortem report and the testimony of Dr. R.K. Mathur
(PW-15), who conducted the autopsy, cause of death was two
lacerated wounds on his head which have specifically been
attributed to co-accused. The applicant was on bail during trial
with no allegation of its misuse. Hearing of the appeal is likely to
take time.
In view thereof, the suspension of sentence application is
allowed. The substantive sentence awarded to the applicant by the
learned trial Court vide judgment dated 14.11.2025 shall remain
suspended during pendency of the appeal provided she furnishes
bail bonds to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court to the
effect that she shall appear before this Court on or before
04.03.2026 and as and when called upon to do so till disposal of
the appeal and subject to following conditions:
1. That she 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 change the place
of residence, she will give in writing her changed
address to the learned trial Court as well as to
counsel in the High Court who shall, in turn,
inform this Court.
(Uploaded on 29/01/2026 at 07:25:37 PM)
(Downloaded on 15/02/2026 at 07:25:28 AM)
##PAGE3##[2026:RJ-JP:4098-DB] (3 of 3) [SOSA-2429/2025]
3. Similarly, if the sureties change their
address(s), they will give in writing their changed
address to the learned trial Court.
The learned trial Court shall keep the record of attendance of
the accused-applicant in a separate file. Such file be registered as
Criminal Misc. Case relating to original case in which the accused-
applicant was tried and convicted. A copy of this order shall also
be placed in that file for ready reference. Criminal Misc. file shall
not been taken into account for statistical purpose relating to
pendency and disposal of the case in the trial Court. In case, the
said accused-applicant do not appear before the learned trial
Court, learned trial Judge shall report the matter to the High Court
for cancellation of benefit extended by this order.
(CHANDRA PRAKASH SHRIMALI),J (MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL),J
GAURAV SHARMA /17
(Up
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.