[2025:RJ-JP:24704] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 1228/2025 in S.B. Criminal Appeal No.1199/2025 Vivek Urf Pappu S/o Hargun, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Jaisinghpura Police Station Baalghat, District Karauli (At Present Confined In Central Jail, Bharatpur) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. A.K. Gupta, Senior Advocate with Mr. Rinesh Gupta, Mr. Saurabh Pratap Singh Chauhan For Respondent(s) : Mr. Devi Singh, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN Order 04/07/2025 1. The instant application for suspension of sentence is preferred by appellant - Vivek @ Pappu S/o Hargun in pending appeal filed aggrieved from order of conviction and sentence dated 23.04.2025 in Sessions Case No.155/2011 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge No.1, Hindaun City, Karauli whereby appellant was convicted for offence under Sections 307 and 324 IPC and sentenced accordingly. 2. Learned Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of appellant submitted that appellant is an innocent person and he is falsely implicated by police. He further submitted that on the basis of Parchabayan Ex.P-9 of PW-11 Mukeshi, FIR was registered, [2025:RJ-JP:24704] (2 of 4) [SOSA-1228/2025] wherein present appellant was not named as an accused. He further submitted that PW-19 Brahmanand came in evidence to corroborate the story. He further referred statement of PW-17 Dr. Shyam Singhal and PW-21 and PW-22 and submitted that the injuries were simple in nature and they were not dangerous to life. He further referred the facts of the case and submitted that there was a cross case of the incident and it was just a free fight but use of fire arm was not intended which is evident from the investigation conducted by police. He further referred the cross- examination of PW-3, PW-6, PW-8 and PW-11 and submitted that the fire arm trigerred due to snatching by Santosh, who is wife of Hargun. At last, he submitted that appellant was on bail during trial and disposal of appeal will take its own time. 3. Aforesaid contentions were opposed by learned Public Prosecutor. He submitted custody certificate and same is taken on record. 4. Heard learned Senior Advocate for appellant and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the record. 5. On the basis of report, Ex.P-9 filed by PW-11 Mukesh, FIR No. 67/2010 under Section 307 IPC was registered at P.S. Hindaun City. After investigation, police has filed charge-sheet against two persons. After framing charge, prosecution has examined 22 witnesses and exhibited 19 documents. The accused was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and in defence, DW-1 Dr. Om Prakash was examined and 9 documents were exhibited. Learned trial court has convicted appellant under Sections 307 and 324 IPC, but acquitted another. The maximum sentence awarded to appellant is 7 years. [2025:RJ-JP:24704] (3 of 4) [SOSA-1228/2025] 6. The appellant was on bail during trial and there is no criminal antecedents submitted by learned Public Prosecutor. We have considered the statement of doctors and also of the injured as referred by learned Senior Advocate, particularly their cross- examination. 7. At this stage, it is not possible for us to express any opinion on merits of the case, but looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, it is a fit case to enlarge appellant on bail. 8. Therefore, without expressing any opinion on merits, I am of considered view that it is a fit case wherein appellant can be enlarged on bail. The application under Section 430(1) B.N.S.S. is allowed and sentence of appellant accused-Vivek @ Pappu S/o Hargun is suspended till disposal of appeal with the condition that he would executes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/-with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for his appearance in this court on 28.10.2025 and whenever ordered to do so till the disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated below:- 1. After release of appellant on bail, he will not indulge in any criminal activity and if it is found that he is involved in any criminal activity, the order shall be recalled. 2. That he will appear before the trial Court in the month of January of every year till the appeal is decided. 3. That if the applicant(s) changes the place of residence, he will give in writing his changed [2025:RJ-JP:24704] (4 of 4) [SOSA-1228/2025] address to the trial Court as well as to the counsel in the High Court. 4. Similarly, if the sureties change their address(s), he will give in writing their changed address to the trial Court. 9. Misc. Application stands disposed of. 10. A copy of this order be sent to learned trial court through E- mail. (ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J PREETI VALECHA /20