[2025:RJ-JP:10997-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application No. 2158/2024 in D. B. Criminal Appeal No.420/2024 1. Ramdhan S/o Bhonrilal @ Bhorya, Aged About 59 Years, Resident Of Bariyara Police Station Malarnadungar, District Sawai Madhopur (Presently Confined In Central Jail Bharatpur) 2. Chauthmal S/o Ramdhan, Aged About 28 Years, Resident Of Bariyara Police Station Malarnadungar, District Sawai Madhopur (Presently Confined In Central Jail Bharatpur) ----Petitioners Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Harendra Sinsinwar, Advocate. For Respondent(s) For Complainant : : Mr. Vivek Sharma, Additional Government Advocate assisted by Mr. Aman Kumar, Advocate and Mr. Gaurav Gupta, Advocate. Mr. Teeka Ram Meena, Advocate. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJEET SINGH HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAMIL KUMAR MATHUR Order 11/03/2025 1. This suspension of sentence application has been filed by the accused-applicants along with the appeal. 2. Counsel appearing on behalf of the accused-applicants submit that the accused-applicants have been convicted and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment for the offence under Section 302 of IPC read with Section 34 thereof. [2025:RJ-JP:10997-DB] (2 of 3) [SOSA-2158/2024] 3. Counsel for the accused-applicants has annexed the certificate under Rule 311 (3) of the Rajasthan High Court Rules to the effect that accused-applicants are in judicial custody. Counsel further submits that the accused-applicants have falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel further submits that according to Typed Report (Exhibit P4) which has been lodged by Jitendra-PW2 son of deceased-Satyanarayan, in which he has specifically stated that co-accused Ramkesh has caused head injury on the person of the deceased, and subsequently, he has improved his version while recording of his statement in front of the police under Section 161 Cr.P.C and also while recording of his statement in the Court wherein names of additional accused persons were added by him. Counsel further submits that accused-applicants were on bail during trial and the appeal is not likely to be heard in near future. Therefore, he prayed that sentence awarded to the accused- applicants may be suspended and the accused-applicants be released on bail during the pendency of the appeal. 4. Learned Additional Government Advocate assisted by learned counsel for the complainant has opposed the present application for suspension of sentence and submitted that according to statement of eyewitnesses, both the accused persons have caused injuries on the person of the deceased. 5. We have heard counsel for the parties and perused the record. 6. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case; Typed Report (Exhibit P4) which has been lodged by the son (Jitendra) of the deceased (Satyanaraya) after consulting an advocate; that the accused-applicants were on bail during trial; [2025:RJ-JP:10997-DB] (3 of 3) [SOSA-2158/2024] that hearing/disposal of appeal is likely to take long time, we deem it just and proper to allow this criminal miscellaneous suspension of sentence application. 7. In that view of the matter, this criminal miscellaneous suspension of sentence application is allowed and it is ordered that execution of sentence awarded to the accused-applicants shall remain suspended during the pendency of the criminal appeal and the accused-applicants be admitted to bail subject to satisfaction of the trial Court with the stipulation that the accused-applicants shall appear before this Court on 17.04.2025 and thereafter as and when called upon to do so. 8. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the concerned trial Court through e-mail/fax for necessary compliance. (PRAMIL KUMAR MATHUR),J (INDERJEET SINGH),J Tushar/16