[2025:RJ-JP:35164] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 1398/2025 Shivraj Son Of Shri Ambalal, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Shokliya Tehsil Sarwar District Ajmer Raj. (At Present Accused Petitioner Confined In Central Jail Ajmer) ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P. 2. Kekri Sahkari Bhoomi Vikas Bank Limited Kekri, Branch Bhinay District Ajmer Through Secreatry Shri Yogendra Kumar Gupta. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajkumar Kasana For Respondent(s) : Mr. Onkar Singh Rajpurohit, P.P. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI Order 03/09/2025 1. The application for suspension of sentence has been filed by the petitioner under Section 438 r/w 442 of B.N.S.S. against the judgment dated 09.10.2019 passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate No.2, Kekri (Ajmer) and affirmed by judgment dated 14.07.2025 passed by learned Additional District & Sessions Judge No.1, Kekri, Ajmer. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been convicted by the learned Trial Court for offence(s) under Section 138 of N.I. Act and sentenced with a maximum period of one year simple imprisonment along with fine as per judgment dated 09.10.2019. Counsel further submits that the petitioner has also filed an appeal before the learned Appellate Court and the [2025:RJ-JP:35164] (2 of 3) [CRLR-1398/2025] same was dismissed, while affirming the judgment of the Trial Court, vide its order dated 14.07.2025. Counsel has annexed the Certificate under Rule 311 of High Court Rules, 1952 to the effect that the applicant was on bail during trial & pendency of appeal and presently, he is behind the bars. Counsel further submits that the interest amount, in question has already been deposited by the petitioner and as per the Certificate dated 19.07.2025, issued by respondent No. 2, no amount is due to be recovered from the petitioner. Counsel also submits that the learned Trial Court has not appreciated the facts & circumstances of the case holistically and the hearing of the revision petition will take its own time, hence, the sentence awarded to the applicant-petitioner may be suspended during the pendency of the revision petition. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer regarding suspension of sentence. 4. Looking to the term of sentence, perusing the certificate issued by respondent No.2 & without commenting upon the merits of the case and considering the submissions made at bar, this Court deems it just and proper to suspend the sentence awarded to the petitioner. 5. Accordingly, this application for suspension of sentence, is allowed and it is hereby ordered that the execution of sentence awarded to the petitioner, namely Shivraj Son Of Shri Ambalal, by the Trial Court vide judgment dated 09.10.2019 and affirmed by the Appellate Court vide order dated 14.07.2025 shall remain suspended during the pendency of the revision petition, provided he furnishes a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- together with two [2025:RJ-JP:35164] (3 of 3) [CRLR-1398/2025] sureties of Rs.25,000/- each, to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court with the stipulation that he shall appear before this Court on 07.10.2025 and thereafter, as and when he is called upon to do so. (VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI),J SAURABH /39