HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR.

D.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal)

No. 1014/2025 Ladhu Ram @ Ladu Ram S/o Hira Ram, Aged About 60 Years, R/o Kabuli Police Station Dhorimanna, District Barmer.

(At Present Lodged In District Jail Barmer)

----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Jitendra Ojha For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sharwan Singh Rathore, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR SHARMA

Order

16/02/2026

1. The present application has been filed by the applicant under Section 389 of the Cr.P.C. (430 of BNSS, 2023) seeking suspension of sentence awarded to him by the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge No.2, Barmer (hereinafter referred to as ’trial Court’) vide judgment dated 16.04.2025 passed in Session Case No.67/2024, whereby following sentences have been awarded against the accused-applicant.

2. Learned counsel for the applicant-appellant submits that the present application for suspension of sentence has been filed on behalf of the accused applicant on the ground that he has been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned counsel submits that the incident is of late night of 04.05.2020 for which an FIR was registered on 05.05.2020 at 05:14 pm. He submits that before lodging FIR on an information being given to the police, the police reached the site. The applicant was proceeded against under sections 107 and 151 of Cr.PC after he was produced before the Sub Divisional Magistrate. He submits that if on 05.05.2020, the applicant was produced before the Sub Divisional Magistrate and order was passed under Sections 107 and 151 of Cr.PC in which there was no allegation of rape then lodging of the FIR after 19 hours of the incident is nothing but an afterthought to falsely implicate the applicant in the present case. Learned counsel, therefore, submits that the entire story of the prosecution is worthless and cannot be relied upon. He, therefore, prays that the application seeking suspension of sentence filed by the applicant may be allowed and sentence awarded to him by the learned trial court may be suspended during pendency of the appeal.

3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor though opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant, however, he is not in a position to refute the fact that if the incident had taken place at 10:00 pm at night on 04.05.2020 for which the proceedings were initiated in the early morning before before the Sub Divisional Magistrate in which no allegation of rape was leveled, then how the FIR was registered on 05.05.2020.

4. We have considered the submissions made at the Bar and have gone through the relevant record of the case.

5. Considering the fact that there is no plausible explanation for lodging the FIR on 05.05.2020 at 5:14 pm and the complaint in which the applicant was produced before the Sub Divisional Magistrate, there is no mention of rape creates doubt in the entire prosecution story, without commenting on the merit and demerit of the case, this Court deems it appropriate to suspend the sentence of the applicant-appellant.

6. Accordingly, the application for suspension of sentence filed by the applicant-appellant is hereby allowed. It is ordered that the sentence passed by the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge No.2, Barmer vide judgment dated 16.04.2025 in Session Case No.67/2024 against the applicant – Ladhu Ram @ Ladu Ram S/o Hira Ram shall remain suspended till final disposal of the aforesaid appeal and he shall be released on bail, provided he executes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- each with two sureties of Rs.50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for his appearance in this Cour