[2025:RJ-JP:10997-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Suspension Of Sentence Application No. 2483/2024 in D. B. Criminal Appeal No.449/2024 1. Ramkesh Son Of Gangaram, Aged About 51 Years, R/o Bariyara Police Station Malarna Doongar District Sawai Madhopur At Present Confined At Jail Tonk 2. Pukhraj Son Of Gangaram, Aged About 62 Years, R/o Bariyara Police Station Malarna Doongar District Sawai Madhopur At Present Confined At Jail Tonk ----Petitioners Versus Stateof Rajasthan, Through P.p ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajesh Goswami, 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. Heard on the present application for suspension of sentence filed on behalf of the accused-applicants no.1 and 2 namely Ramkesh and Pukhraj respectively. 2. Counsel for the accused-applicants wants to withdraw the suspension of sentence application filed on behalf of accused- applicant no.1 Ramkesh, at this stage. 3. In that view of the matter, this suspension of sentence application filed on behalf of accused-applicant no.1 Ramkesh is dismissed, as prayed for. [2025:RJ-JP:10997-DB] (2 of 3) [SOSA-2483/2024] 4. So far as the accused-applicant no.2 namely Pukhraj is concerned, counsel submits that the accused-applicant has been convicted and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment for the offence under Section 302 of IPC read with Section 34 thereof. 5. Counsel for the accused-applicant no.2 namely Pukhraj has annexed the certificate under Rule 311 (3) of the Rajasthan High Court Rules to the effect that accused-applicant no.2 namely Pukhraj is in judicial custody. Counsel further submits that the accused-applicant no.2 namely Pukhraj has falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel further submits that according to Exhibit P4 (Typed Report) which has been lodged by Jitendra-PW2 son of deceased-Satyanarayan, co-accused Ramkesh (accused-applicant no.1) has caused head injury on the person of the deceased, and subsequently, he has improved his version during his police statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C and also while recording of his statement in the Court, names of additional accused persons were added by him. Counsel further submits that accused-applicant no.2 namely Pukhraj was 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-applicant no.2 namely Pukhraj may be suspended and he be released on bail during the pendency of the appeal. 6. Learned Additional Government Advocate assisted by learned counsel for the complainant has opposed the present application for suspension of sentence filed on behalf of accused-applicant no.2 namely Pukhraj and submitted that according to statement of eyewitnesses, he along with accused-applicant no.1 namely Ramkesh caused injuries to the person of the deceased. [2025:RJ-JP:10997-DB] (3 of 3) [SOSA-2483/2024] 7. We have heard counsel for the parties and perused the record. 8. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case; Exhibit P4 (Typed Report) which has been lodged by the son (Jitendra) of the deceased (Satyanarayan) after consulting an advocate; that the accused-applicant no.2 namely Pukhraj was on bail during trial; 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. 9. 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-applicant no.2 namely Pukhraj shall remain suspended during the pendency of the criminal appeal and accused-applicant no.2 namely Pukhraj be admitted to bail subject to satisfaction of the trial Court with the stipulation that accused-applicant no.2 namely Pukhraj shall appear before this Court on 17.04.2025, and thereafter, as and when called upon to do so. 10. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the concerned trial Court through e-mail/fax for necessary compliance. 11. Hence, this application for suspension of sentence stands dismissed as withdrawn as prayed with respect to accused- applicant no.1 namely Ramkesh and stands allowed in respect of accused-applicant no.2 namely Pukhraj. (PRAMIL KUMAR MATHUR),J (INDERJEET SINGH),J Tushar/17