[2026:RJ-JP:11858-DB]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Criminal Misc. IIIrd Suspension Of Sentence Application No.

2270/2025 In D.B. Criminal Appeal No.73/2024 Mujahid Son Of Javed Masood, Resident Of Raj Talkies Road, Tonk Thana Kotwali, District Tonk (Rajasthan) (At Present Confined In Central Jail, Ajmer)

----Petitioner Versus The State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kunal Jaiman For Respondent(s) : Mr. Jitendra Singh Rathore, Addl.G.A Mr. Praveen Kumar Jain, for the complainant HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJEET SINGH HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BHUWAN GOYAL

Order

19/03/2026

1. This suspension of sentence application has been filed by the accused-applicant along with the appeal.

2. Learned counsel for the accused-applicant submits that the accused-applicant has been convicted for the offences under Sections 302, 379 & 201 of IPC.

3. Learned counsel for the accused-applicant submits that the accused-applicant has been falsely implicated in this matter and he has served the sentence for more than six years. He further submits that the sentence of life imprisonment has been awarded to the accused-applicant for the offence under Section 302 of IPC.

He further submits that the hearing of appeal may take long time and prayed that sentence awarded to the accused-applicant may be suspended and he be released on bail during the pendency of the appeal.

4. Learned Additional Government Advocate assisted by learned counsel for the complainant has opposed the application for suspension of sentence and submits that the first suspension of sentence application filed on behalf of the accused-applicant was dismissed on merits by this Court vide its order dated 08.05.2024, which reads as under:-

“Heard counsel for the parties.

Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this matter and there is no last seen witnesses in this matter and the case is of circumstantial evidence.

Learned Deputy Government Advocate assisted by counsel for the complainant opposed the suspension of sentence application and submits that Mohammed Juned Khan (PW-5) & Rahil Juberi (PW-11) in their statement recorded during trial have stated that they have seen the applicant with the deceased on the date of alleged incident. He further submits that according to the statement of Shamama (PW-3) who is wife of the applicant, prior to the date of alleged incident the applicant has beated him and after murdering of her father, he came to her and informed that he has committed a mistake about murder of her father. He further submits that according to the document (Ex.P-20) mobile location of the applicant is found near place of the alleged incident.

Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the present case, the statements of Shamama (PW-3), Mohammed Juned Khan (PW-5) & Rahil Juberi (PW-11) and the document i.e. (Ex.P-20) as well as the fact that weapon i.e. Gun has been recovered at the instance of the applicant and looking to the conduct of the applicant and the seriousness of the offence(s) against the applicant, in our view, no case is made out for allowing the application for suspension of sentence.

Hence, this suspension of sentence application is dismissed.”

5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

6. Considering the submissions put-forth by learned counsel for the parties and taking into account the facts and circumstances of the present case as well as looking to the seriousness of the offence(s) alleged against the accused-applicant and also considering the fact that since the first suspension of sentence application filed on behalf of the accused-applicant was dismissed on merits by this Court vide its order dated 08.05.2024 and thereafter except the change of counsel as well as the period of custody, there is no change in circumstances, in our considered view, no case is made out to allow the application fo