[2025:RJ-JP:4065-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Criminal Misc 3rd Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 810/2024 In D.B. Criminal Appeal No.695/2017 Banti @ Irphan S/o Shri Kurban Ali, R/o Near Neelgaro Ki Masjid, Kanwas, District Kota (Raj) (At Present Confined In Central Jail Kota) ----Accused-Applicant Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p 2. Xxx, D/o Shri Surajmal,R/O Khatiko Ka Mohalla, Kanwas, District Kota, Raj. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Govind Prasad Rawat For Respondent(s) For Complainant : : Mr. Vivek Sharma, Addl.GA with Ms. Neha Goyal None Present HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BHUWAN GOYAL Order 29/01/2025 1. This is third application for suspension of sentence filed by the applicant. 2. Counsel for the applicant has annexed the certificate under Rule 311 (3) of the Rajasthan High Court Rules alongwith memo of appeal and has also placed on record the custody certificate issued by the Central Jail, Kota to the effect that the sentence of life imprisonment has been awarded to the applicant under Section 376(2)(G) of IPC and he is in judicial custody at Central [2025:RJ-JP:4065-DB] (2 of 4) [SOSA-810/2024] Jail Kota. He further submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this matter. He also submits that sentence awarded to co-accused Kalu @ Salam and Kalam have already been suspended by the Coordinate Bench of this court. He further submits that while rejecting the first suspension of sentence application of the applicant on 07.11.2017, a liberty was granted to move fresh application for suspension of sentence after completion of seven years of incarceration. The applicant has served the sentence of more than twelve years and the hearing of appeal may take long time. Therefore he prays that sentence awarded to the applicant may be suspended and he be released on bail during the pendency of the appeal. 3. Counsel for the applicant has relied upon the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Ranjeet Raut Vs. State of GNCT Delhi (Special Leave Petition (Criminal) Diary No.(s). 22968/2020, decided on 23.07.2021, in which, it has been held as under:- “The petitioner was convicted under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life. The appeal filed by the petitioner before the High Court is pending. An application was moved by the petitioner before the High Court for suspension of sentence which was rejected. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner is before this Court. We are informed by Counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has undergone sentence of 7 years and 4 months. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that there is no likelihood of the appeal being decided soon. The Counsel for the State submitted that the evidence of PWs 1 and 2, which was accepted by the trial court shows that the [2025:RJ-JP:4065-DB] (3 of 4) [SOSA-810/2024] petitioner has committed a grave offence under Section 302. He requested this Court to permit the petitioner to renew his application for suspension of sentence after some time or direct the appeal to be heard. We are not inclined to give any direction to the High Court to dispose of the appeal out of turn. Taken into account the fact that the petitioner has undergone sentence of more than 7 years, we deem it fit and proper to grant his prayer for suspension of sentence. The petitioner is directed to be released on bail subject to the satisfaction of the trial court. The special leave petition is disposed of. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.” 4. He further relied upon the judgment passed by the 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, has been 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 Additional Government Advocate has opposed the suspension of sentence application and submits that information regarding present third application for SOS has been given to the complainant. 6. Despite information, no one is present today on behalf of the complainant. [2025:RJ-JP:4065-DB] (4 of 4) [SOSA-810/2024] 7. We have heard counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the present case and also considering the fact that the applicant has served the sentence for a period of more than twelve years as well as the judgments passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Ranjeet Raut and Saudan Singh (both supra) and the hearing of appeal may take long time, We deem it just and proper to allow this criminal miscellaneous suspension of sentence application. 9. In that view of the matter, this criminal miscellaneous third suspension of sentence application is allowed and it is ordered that execution of sentence awarded to the applicant shall remain suspended during the pendency of the criminal appeal and the applicant be admitted to bail subject to satisfaction of the trial Court with the stipulation that he shall appear before this Court on 27.02.2025 and thereafter as and when called upon to do so. 10. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the concerned trial Court through e-mail/fax for necessary compliance. (BHUWAN GOYAL),J (NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J Anu /40