[2025:RJ-JP:29095] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 1395/2025 In S.B. Criminal Appeal No.1916/2025 1. Aaseen Khan Son Of Fajru Khan, Aged About 35 Years, Resident Of Mohra Ka Bas, Tan Khutenta Kalan, Police Station M.i.a Alwar District Alwar (Raj) (Accused Appellant Are In District Jail Alwar) 2. Aasu Khan Son Of Fajru Khan, Aged About 37 Years, Resident Of Mohra Ka Bas, Tan Khutenta Kalan, Police Station M.i.a Alwar District Alwar (Raj) (Accused Appellant Are In District Jail Alwar) 3. Fajru Khan Son Of Chote Khan, Aged About 71 Years, Resident Of Mohra Ka Bas, Tan Khutenta Kalan, Police Station M.i.a Alwar District Alwar (Raj) (Accused Appellant Are In District Jail Alwar) 4. Ali Mohammad Son Of Fajru Khan, Aged About 41 Years, Resident Of Mohra Ka Bas, Tan Khutenta Kalan, Police Station M.i.a Alwar District Alwar (Raj) (Accused Appellant Are In District Jail Alwar) ----Petitioners Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Swati Sharma for Mr. Girish Khandelwal For Respondent(s) : Mr. Devi Singh, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN Order 31/07/2025 1. Instant SOS application is preferred by appellants-accused Aaseen Khan S/o Fajru Khan, Aasu Khan S/o Fajru Khan, Fajru Khan S/o Chote Khan and Ali Mohammad S/o Fajru Khan in pending appeal, filed aggrieved from judgment of [2025:RJ-JP:29095] (2 of 4) [SOSA-1395/2025] conviction and sentence dated 10.07.2025 in Sessions Case No.76/2016 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Laxmangarh, District Alwar, whereby these appellants-accused were convicted and sentenced under Sections 3/8 (1), 9 and 10 of Rajasthan Bovine Animal (Prohibition of Temporary Migration or Export) Act, 1995. The maximum sentence awarded to each of appellants-accused is 4 years. 2. Learned counsel for appellants submit that appellants are innocent persons and they were falsely implicated by police. She further submitted that no recovery was effected and there is no independent witness in the matter. She also submitted that the Trial Court has ignored the material contradiction and discrepancies in the statement of witnesses. She further submitted that out of 4 cases shown against Aasu, 2 were already disposed of and remaining third one is triable by Magistrate. She further submitted that out of 2 cases registered against Aaseen, one is already been disposed of, and other one is present one. She further submitted that there is one case, registered against Ali Mohammad and same is present one, whereas two cases are registered against Fajru Khan and one of them related to an incident of 1996. At last, he submitted that appellants-accused were on bail during trial and disposal of appeal will take its own time. 3. Aforesaid contentions were opposed by learned Public Prosecutor and he submitted custody certificate along with criminal antecedents received from P.S. Barodamev, District Alwar. 4. Heard learned counsel for appellants and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the record. [2025:RJ-JP:29095] (3 of 4) [SOSA-1395/2025] 5. On basis of report (Ex.P-1) lodged by PW-1 (Murari Lal) about cruelty to a calf by unknown person, FIR No.108/2016 was registered and after identification, during investigation, police has filed charge-sheet against 4 appellants-accused. After framing the charge, the prosecution has examined 15 witnesses and exhibited 24 documents. These accused were examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C., but they have not submitted any defence evidence, ultimately the Trial Court has convicted and sentenced all these appellants-accused. 6. We have considered criminal antecedents against all accused and there is no case against Ali Mohammad except present one. Similarly, a case against Aaseen, shown as disposed of by way of compromise, and there is no detail about a case registered against Fajru Khan in year 1996. The details indicate that one of the case registered against Aasu, has been disposed of by way of compromise and another one is registered on basis of complaint about noise pollution and third one relates to another incident of year 1996. These appellants-accused were on bail during trial and disposal of appeal will take its own time. It is not possible for us to express any opinion on the merits of the case, but having considered the totality of facts and circumstances of the case, it is appropriate to allow SOS application of all these 4 appellants- accused. 7. In view of discussion made hereinabove, the suspension of sentence application is hereby allowed and it is ordered that sentence of applicants-accused Aaseen Khan S/o Fajru Khan, Aasu Khan S/o Fajru Khan, Fajru Khan S/o Chote Khan and Ali Mohammad S/o Fajru Khan is suspended till disposal of [2025:RJ-JP:29095] (4 of 4) [SOSA-1395/2025] appeal with the condition that each of them would execute a personal bond in the sum of ₹50,000/- with two sureties of ₹25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for their appearance in this Court on 24.11.2025 and whenever ordered to do so till the disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated below:- 1. That the appellants-accused shall not indulge in any criminal activity and not repeat crime of any nature during period of suspension of sentence/bail. 2. That the appellants will appear before the Trial Court in the month of January of every year till the appeal is decided. 3. That if the appellants change the place of residence, they will give in writing his changed address to the trial Court as well as to the counsel in the High Court. 4. Similarly, if the sureties change their address(s), they will give in writing their changed address to the trial Court. 8. In case, the applicants have violated any condition then the order of suspension of sentence shall be recalled and cancelled. 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 GAURAV /08