[2025:RJ-JP:36502] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Misc 4th Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 1606/2025 In S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 1595/2024 Prakash S/o Shri Raghuveer, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Kalwan Resident Of Police Station Manpur District Dausa (Presently Lodged In Central Jail, Shyalawas Dausa) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Meghraj Meena For Respondent(s) : Ms. Arti Sharma, PP with Mr. Shubham Kumar Sain, AAAG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN Order 09/09/2025 1. The instant fourth application for suspension of sentence is preferred by appellant - Prakash S/o Shri Raghuveer in pending appeal filed aggrieved from order of conviction and sentence dated 04.07.2024 in Sessions Case No.17/2022 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sikrai Dist. Dausa whereby appellant was convicted for offence under Sections 147, 148, 323, 324, 336, 325, 504, 506, 427, 458, 459, 149 and 120B IPC and sentenced accordingly. 2. The first application for SOS of present appellant was dismissed as withdrawn by this Court on 18.10.2024. Interim SOS application No.2030/2024 is allowed on 12.11.2024 for a period [2025:RJ-JP:36502] (2 of 4) [SOSA-1606/2025] from 01.12.2024 to 07.12.2024. Third SOS application was dismissed by this Court on 16.01.2025. Thereafter the appellant has approached Hon’ble Supreme Court by filing SLP (Criminal) No.3525/2025 and same was dismissed on 06.03.2025. Now this is 4th SOS application. 3. Learned counsel for appellant submitted that appellant is an innocent person and he is in custody after pronouncement of conviction and sentence on 04.07.2024. He further submitted that period of custody is more than one year and 2 months after pronouncement of judgment of conviction. He further submitted that even before conviction, the appellant was on bail during trial and he has not misused the liberty granted during trial of sessions case. He also submitted that family of appellant is dependent upon appellant. 4. Aforesaid contentions were opposed by learned Public Prosecutor. She submitted custody certificate and same is taken on record. 5. Heard learned counsel for appellant and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the record. 6. While considering third SOS application, following observations were recorded by this Court: “6. Complainant Bhanu Pratap Singh has filed a report for assault on the night of 17.01.2021 on his crusher and mines. The report indicates that the crowd was led by present-appellant. On basis of this report FIR No. 28/2021 was registered at P.S. Manpur, District Dausa and after investigation charge- sheet under Sections 147, 148, 149, 336, 504, 506, 341, 323, 321, 427, 458, 459 and [2025:RJ-JP:36502] (3 of 4) [SOSA-1606/2025] 120B was filed. Total 14 accused face trial before learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sikrai, District Dausa and after full trial accused-Pintu was convicted under Sections 147, 148, 341, 323/149, 324/149, 325/149, 336, 504, 506, 427, 458, 459 and 120B, but other 13 accused including present-appellant Prakash were convicted under Sections 147, 148, 341, 323/149, 324/149, 336, 504, 506, 427, 458, 459 and 120B IPC. The maximum punishment awarded was rigorous imprisonment of 10 years under Section 459 IPC. 7. This Court while considering SOS application No. 1197/2024 and 1198/2024 has granted SOS to 13 accused including accused-Pintu, but SOS application of present appellant was dismissed as withdrawn on 18.10.2024. 8. Since 18.10.2024, no circumstances have changed except for the period of incarceration. At the time of consideration of SOS on 18.10.2024, entire merits were considered by this Court. 9. We have considered the statement of PW2 (Rajendra Singh), PW3 (Balbir Singh), PW7 (Gajraj Singh) and PW17 (Santram) as referred by learned counsel for appellant. A perusal of report registered by complainant and also the statement clearly indicate that an unruly mob, led by present appellant attacked around 09.30 PM on 17.01.2021 at the premises of complainant. Learned Trial Court after considering a pre-meditated attack on the basis of evidence available on record has convicted the accused under Section 459 of [2025:RJ-JP:36502] (4 of 4) [SOSA-1606/2025] IPC. We have gone through injury report of Rajendra Singh (PW2) as referred by the counsel for appellant. 10. Though the attribution was upon Pintu, who was already released on bail after allowing his SOS but the entire incident was a result of a leader-ship of present appellant. A fact is apparent on record that present appellant is brother of village Sarpanch and appellant led the unruly mob which indulged in assault on complainant and injured. The unruly mob attached the premises and vandalized the premises of a business establishment.” 7. After dismissal of SOS, order is challenged before Hon’ble Supreme Court by filing SLP (Criminal) and same was dismissed on 06.03.2025. 8. Having considered the totality of facts and circumstances of the case and also the material placed on record, no case is made out in favour of appellant to release him on bail. 9. Accordingly, 4th SOS application preferred by appellant Prakash S/o Raghuveer is hereby dismissed. Misc. application stands disposed of. (ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J PREETI VALECHA /04