##PAGE1##

[2026:RJ-JP:20083-DB]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

BENCH AT JAIPUR

D.B. Criminal Misc. 2^nd Suspension Of Sentence Application No.

790/2026

in

D. B. Criminal Appeal No.262/2022

Dhaniram Son Of Late Shri Thawar Singh, Aged About 37 Years,

R/o Ramsinghpura (Sagsan) Police Station Shahjahanpur, District

Alwar (Raj.) (At Present Serving Sentence In Central Jail Alwar)

----Petitioner

Versus

State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p.

----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Govind Prasad Rawat, Advocate.

For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rishi Raj Singh Rathore, Deputy

Government Advocate assisted by Mr.

Vinod Kumar Gupta and Mr. Amit

Kumar Gupta, Advocate.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJEET SINGH

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN

Order

12/05/2026

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

accused-applicant along with the appeal.

2. Counsel appearing on behalf of the accused-applicant

submits that the accused-applicant has been convicted and

sentenced to undergo life imprisonment for the offence punishable

under Section 302 IPC.

3. Counsel for the accused-applicant has annexed the certificate

under Rule 311 (3) of the Rajasthan High Court Rules to the effect

that accused-applicant is in judicial custody. Counsel further

(Uploaded on 14/05/2026 at 10:13:30 AM)

(Downloaded on 19/05/2026 at 04:20:34 AM)

[2026:RJ-JP:20083-DB] (2 of 3) [SOSA-790/2026]

submits that the accused-applicant has been falsely implicated in

this matter and the accused-applicant has already served the

sentence for a period of more than ten years and the appeal is not

likely to be heard in near future. Therefore, he prayed that

sentence awarded to the accused-applicant may be suspended

and he be released on bail during the pendency of the appeal.

4. Counsel for the accused-applicant relied upon the judgment

of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of ‘Saudan Singh versus

The State of Uttar Pradesh’, (Criminal Appeal No.308/2022

(SLP (Crl.) No.4633/2021), decided on 25.02.2022, wherein

it is held as under:

“The second category of cases can be one

where the person has served out more

than 10 years of sentence. In these cases

also at one go bail can be granted unless

there are any extenuating circumstances

against him.”

5. Learned Deputy Government Advocate opposed the

application for suspension of sentence.

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 fact that the accused-applicant has

already served the sentence for a period of more than ten years

and hearing of appeal may take long time and also in view of

judgment passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of

‘Saudan Singh’ (supra), we deem it just and proper to allow this

criminal miscellaneous suspension of sentence application.

8. In that view of the matter, this criminal miscellaneous

suspension of sentence application is allowed and it is ordered that

(Uploaded on 14/05/2026 at 10:13:30 AM)

(Downloaded on 19/05/2026 at 04:20:34 AM)

[2026:RJ-JP:20083-DB] (3 of 3) [SOSA-790/2026]

execution of sentence awarded to the accused-applicant shall

remain suspended during the pendency of the criminal appeal and

the accused-applicant be admitted to bail subject to satisfaction of

the trial Court with the stipulation that he shall appear before this

Court on 06.07.2026 and thereafter as and when called upon to

do so.

9. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the

concerned trial Court through e-mail/fax for necessary

compliance.

(SAMEER JAIN),J (INDERJEET SINGH),J

Tushar/17

(Uploaded on 14/05/2026 at 10:13:30 AM)

(Downloaded on 19/05/2026 at 04:20:34 AM)