[2025:RJ-JP:34946] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Misc. Suspension of Sentence Application No.370/2025 In S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 1573/2025 Kirtiram (Teertharam) S/o Bhagwan Singh, R/o Pidani, Bharatpur, Raj. (Confined In Central Jail Sewar, Bharatpur) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Navankur Dubey For Respondent(s) : Mr. Amit Gupta, P.P. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI Order 01/09/2025 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 21.12.2019 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bharatpur and affirmed by judgment dated 20.08.2025 passed by learned Special Judge, Dacoity Affected Area, Bharatpur. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been convicted by the learned Trial Court for offences under Section 7(1)/16 of Food Adulteration Prevention Act, 1954 and sentenced with a maximum period of two years simple imprisonment along with fine as per judgment dated 21.12.2019 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bharatpur. Counsel further submits that the petitioner has also filed an appeal before [2025:RJ-JP:34946] (2 of 3) [CRLR-1573/2025] the learned Appellate Court and the same was dismissed, while affirming the judgment of the Trial Court, vide its order dated 20.08.2025 passed by learned Special Judge, Dacoity Affected Area, Bharatpur. Counsel has annexed the Certificate under Rule 311 of High Court Rules, 1952 to the effect that the petitioner was on bail during trial & pendency of appeal and presently, he is behind the bars. 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 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, 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 Kirtiram (Teertharam) S/o Bhagwan Singh, by the Trial Court vide judgment dated 21.12.2019 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bharatpur and affirmed by the Appellate Court vide order dated 20.08.2025 passed by learned Special Judge, Dacoity Affected Area, Bharatpur, shall remain suspended during the pendency of the revision petition, provided he furnishes a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- together with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each, to the [2025:RJ-JP:34946] (3 of 3) [CRLR-1573/2025] satisfaction of the learned Trial Court with the stipulation that he shall appear before this Court on 06.10.2025 and thereafter, as and when he is called upon to do so. (VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI),J SAURABH /24