[2025:RJ-JP:16548-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 2202/2024 In D.B. Criminal Appeal No.431/2024 Hakim Khan S/o Nishar Khan, Aged About 26 Years, R/o Dwarka Nagar, Gali No. 5/1, Plot No. 66, Coach Factory Chhola Road, District Bhopal P.S. Bajariya, Madhya Pradesh (At Present In Central Jail, Jaipur) ----Applicant Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Applicant(s) : Mr. Jitendra Singh Tanwar For Respondent(s) : Mr. Amit Punia, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BHUWAN GOYAL Order 21/04/2025 AVNEESH JHINGAN, J :- 1. This suspension of sentence application has been filed on behalf of Hakim Khan in case of FIR No.28 of 2010 under Sections 302 and 34 IPC lodged at Police Station, Kaladera, District Jaipur. 2. As per the prosecution on 03.03.2010, the conversation among Pradeep (deceased), Munnadas and Shahnawas @ Raju Master with Shankar and Vijendra escalated to altercation in which Hakim Khan and Imrat joined. The applicant was convicted for life imprisonment on 06.08.2024 and ordered to pay fine of [2025:RJ-JP:16548-DB] (2 of 3) [SOSA-2202/2024] Rs.5,000/-. On failure to pay the fine has to undergo an additional simple imprisonment of one year. 3. Aggrieved of the conviction appeal was filed accompanying application for suspension of sentence. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant was not named in the FIR. The cause of death was head injury which was not attributed to the applicant. Reliance is placed upon the cross-examination of Dr. Deepchand Kabra (PW 11) wherein it was stated that injury No.1 (head injury) cannot be caused by kicks and blows. The contention is that there was two days delay in lodging the FIR. Further that there was no medical examination of the deceased on the date of incident. The eye-witness Munnadas(PW1) testified that on the following day of the incident he saw the deceased alive in the factory. The sentence awarded to co-accused has already been suspended by a Co-ordinate Bench vide order dated 08.02.2024. 5. Learned Public Prosecutor submits that applicant is in custody for around one and half year and underwent trial separately as he was not arrested initially. Contention is that as per eye-witness the applicant was active participant in inflicting injuries to the deceased. 6. Before proceeding further it is clarified that the observations made hereinafter is only for the purpose of the deciding the application for suspension of sentence and shall not be construed as an opinion on the merits of the appeal. [2025:RJ-JP:16548-DB] (3 of 3) [SOSA-2202/2024] 7. The applicant is not named in the FIR. There is time gap between the incident and lodging of FIR. The contention that the fatal injury is not attributed to the applicant and the reliance on the testimony of Dr. Deepchand are arguable points to be considered at the time of hearing of the appeal. There is no MLR of the deceased on the date of incident rather one of the witnesses stated that deceased was seen in the factory on the next day. 8. The applicant was on bail during the trial. As per custody certificate annexed, the applicant has no criminal antecedents. The hearing of appeal is likely to take time. 9. The sentence is suspended and the application for suspension of sentence is allowed. It is ordered that execution of sentence awarded to the accused-applicant-Hakim Khan by the trial court vide judgment dated 06.08.2024 in Sessions case No.06/2010 (38/2010) shall remain suspended during the pendency of the appeal and he be admitted to bail subject to satisfaction of the trial court with the stipulation that he shall appear before this Court on 21.05.2025 and thereafter as and when called upon to do so. (BHUWAN GOYAL),J (AVNEESH JHINGAN),J Chandan/Riya/12 Whether Reportable: No