##PAGE1##

[2026:RJ-JP:14069-DB]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

D. B. Criminal Miscellaneous Suspension of Sentence Application No.325/2026

in

D.B. Criminal Appeal (Db) No. 21/2026

1. Sube Singh S/o Ramkishore, Resident Of Ward No. 15, Tijara, Police Station Tijara, District Alwar, Present District Khairthal Tijara, Rajasthan (Presently Confined In District

Jail, Alwar)

2. Manu Yadav S/o Sube Singh, Resident Of Ward No. 15, Tijara, Police Station Tijara, District Alwar, Present District Khairthal Tijara, Rajasthan (Presently Confined In District

Jail, Alwar)

----Appellants Versus

State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor ----Respondent

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Pankaj Gupta, Advocate.

For Respondent(s) : Mr. R. S. Shekhawat, Additional Government Advocate.

For Complainant : Mr. Pradeep Kumar Sharma, Advocate.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJEET SINGH HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN

Order

06/04/2026

1. This suspension of sentence application has been filed by the

accused-applicants along with the appeal.

2. Counsel appearing on behalf of the accused-applicants submits that the accused-applicants have been convicted and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment for the offence punishable

under Section 302 IPC.

(Uploaded on 09/04/2026 at 04:42:20 PM)

(Downloaded on 11/04/2026 at 07:17:57 PM)

[2026:RJ-JP:14069-DB] (2 of 3) [CRLAD-21/2026] 3. Counsel for the accused-applicants has annexed the certificate under Rule 311 (3) of the Rajasthan High Court Rules to

the effect that accused-applicants are in judicial custody.

4. Counsel for the accused-applicants submits that they have falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel further submits that similarly situated accused namely Sher Singh has already been acquitted by the learned Trial Court against whom the allegation of causing injury by using farsi has been leveled in the FIR as well as in the statement of witnesses. Counsel further submits that eye- witnesses PW1 and PW2 have been declared hostile. Counsel further submits that as per story of prosecution, lathis have been recovered at the instance of the accused-applicants. However, recovery witnesses i.e. PW11—Harveer and PW16—Ratan Lal have been declared hostile during trial. Counsel further submits that according to statement of PW9—Nirmala who is the wife of the deceased, in her examination-in-chief, she has stated that the accused-applicants have caused injury on her husband. However, in her cross-examination, she has stated that she has not seen the faces of accused-applicants. Counsel further submits that both the accused-applicants were on bail during trial. Counsel further submits that the hearing/disposal of appeal may take long time. Therefore, he prayed that sentence awarded to the accused- applicants may be suspended and they be released on bail during

the pendency of the appeal.

5. Learned Additional Government Advocate assisted by counsel for the complainant opposed the application for suspension of

sentence.

(Uploaded on 09/04/2026 at 04:42:20 PM)

(Downloaded on 11/04/2026 at 07:17:57 PM)

[2026:RJ-JP:14069-DB] (3 of 3) [CRLAD-21/2026] 6. We have heard counsel for the parties and perused the

record.

7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the present case, and also considering the statement of PWs 1, 2, 11 and 16 and also considering the fact that both the accused-applicants were on bail during trial and also considering the fact that hearing/disposal of appeal may take long time, we deem it just and proper to allow

this application for suspension of sentence.

8. In that view of the matter, this criminal miscellaneous suspension of sentence application is allowed and it is ordered that execution of sentence awarded to the accused-applicants shall remain suspended during the pendency of the criminal appeal and the accused-applicants be admitted to bail subject to satisfaction of the trial Court with the stipulation that they shall appear before this Court on 11.05.2026 and thereafter as and when calle