[2025:RJ-JP:37803-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Criminal Misc IInd Suspension Of Sentence Application No. 1669/2025 in D. B. Criminal Appeal No.110/2023 Tinku Son Of Rohitash, R/o Goonti, Police Station Behror, District Alwar (At Present Confined In Central Jail Jodhpur) ----Applicant Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor ----Respondent For Applicant(s) : Mr. Uma Shankar Pandey For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sudesh Saini, Addl.G.A. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJEET SINGH HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR Order 16/09/2025 1. This application seeking suspension of sentence has been filed by the applicant along with the appeal. 2. Counsel for the accused-applicant submits that the accused- applicant has been convicted and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment for the offences punishable under Section 304-B IPC. 3. Counsel for the applicant has annexed the certificate under Rule 311 (3) of the Rajasthan High Court Rules to the effect that the accused-applicant is in judicial custody. Counsel further submits that the accused-applicant has been falsely implicated in this matter and he has served the sentence for more than 10 years. He further submits that the hearing of appeal may take [2025:RJ-JP:37803-DB] (2 of 3) [SOSA-1669/2025] long time and prayed that sentence awarded to the applicant may be suspended and he be released on bail during the pendency of the appeal. 4. Counsel for the accused-applicant 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, wherein it is 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 application for suspension of sentence. 6. We have heard counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the present case and also considering the fact that the accused-applicant has already served the sentence for a period of more than ten years and also considering the fact that the hearing of appeal may take long time, we deem it just and proper to allow this criminal miscellaneous application seeking suspension of sentence. 8. In that view of the matter, this criminal miscellaneous 2nd suspension of sentence application is allowed and it is ordered that execution of sentence awarded to the accused-applicant shall remain suspended during the pendency of the criminal appeal and the accused-applicant be admitted to bail subject to satisfaction of the trial Court with the stipulation that he shall appear before this [2025:RJ-JP:37803-DB] (3 of 3) [SOSA-1669/2025] Court on 29.10.2025 and thereafter as and when called upon to do so. 9. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the concerned trial Court through e-mail/fax for necessary compliance. (ASHUTOSH KUMAR),J (INDERJEET SINGH),J Tanisha/35