[2025:RJ-JP:18116] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 2489/2024 In S.B. Criminal Appeal No.2829/2024 1. Dinesh Son Of Dharam Singh, Resident Of Nagla Singhara P.s. Rudawal District Bharatpur (Raj) (Presently Confined In Sub Jail Bayana District Bharatpur) 2. Amar Singh Son Of Dharam Singh, Resident Of Nagla Singhara P.s. Rudawal District Bharatpur (Raj) (Presently Confined In Sub Jail Bayana District Bharatpur) ----Petitioners Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Brij Mohan Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vijay Singh Yadav, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN Order 29/04/2025 1. The instant application for suspension of sentence is preferred by appellants-Dinesh Son Of Dharam Singh and Amar Singh Son Of Dharam Singh aggrieved from order of conviction and sentence dated 15.10.2024 in Sessions Case No.60/2021 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge No.1, Bayana whereby appellants were convicted for offence under Sections 323, 324/34 and 307/34 IPC and sentenced accordingly. 2. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that this is a false and fabricated case wherein both the appellants were falsely implicated by complainant party. He further submitted that injured [2025:RJ-JP:18116] (2 of 4) [SOSA-2489/2024] Sohan Singh was examined as PW-2 whereas eye-witness Guman was examined as PW-1 and the discrepancies about the incident were ignored by learned trial court. He also submitted that there is no evidence to suggest that appellants have assaulted injured Sohan Singh with deadly weapons to inflict injuries which were sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of nature. He also submitted that as per PW-2 Sohan, he was injured when he was separating Guman from Jagdish and others. He also submitted that the injury sustained by Sohan is not caused by any deadly weapon rather he suffered injury because he fell on pointed object. He also submitted that this is a case of free fight and from evidence of prosecution, nowhere it was established that it was pre-meditated plan. At last, he submitted that both the appellants were on bail during trial and have not misused the liberty granted to them. 3. Aforesaid contentions were opposed by learned Public Prosecutor. He submitted custody certificates and same are taken on record. 4. Heard learned counsel for appellant and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the record. Also considered reply filed by learned Public Prosecutor. 5. On the basis report, Ex.P-1 submitted by PW-1 Guman Singh at P.S. Rudawal, FIR No.07/2015 under Section 143, 323, 341 and 336 IPC was registered and after investigation, police has filed charge-sheet initially against Jagdish and later against Amar Singh and Dinesh. The trial court has framed charge under Sections 341, 323, 324 and 307/34 IPC. During trial, Jagdish has expired and proceedings were dropped against him. The prosecution has [2025:RJ-JP:18116] (3 of 4) [SOSA-2489/2024] examined 14 witnesses and exhibited 11 documents. The accused were examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and they opted not to file any defence evidence. One document was exhibited by defence. 6. After conviction under Sections 307 or 307/34 IPC, the maximum sentence to each of appellants awarded is 10 years. Both the appellants were on bail during trial. The complainant eye-witness Guman Singh was examined as PW-1 whereas injured Sohan was examined as PW-2 and we have considered the evidence of both the witnesses. Also considered the statement of PW-10 Dr. Charan Singh, PW-11 Dr. Ved Prakash and PW-12 Dr. Rupendra. 7. At this stage, it is not possible for us to express any opinion on merits of the case, but having considered the material placed on record and also grounds as raised herein, it is appropriate to release appellants on bail. 8. Therefore, without expressing any opinion on merits, I am of considered view that it is a fit case wherein appellants can be enlarged on bail. The application under Section 430(1) B.N.S.S. is allowed and sentence of appellants accused- Dinesh Son Of Dharam Singh and Amar Singh Son Of Dharam Singh is suspended till disposal of appeal with the condition that each of them would execute a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for their appearance in this court on 09.08.2025 and whenever ordered to do so till the disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated below:- [2025:RJ-JP:18116] (4 of 4) [SOSA-2489/2024] 1. After release of appellant on bail, they will not indulge in any criminal activity and if it is found that they are involved in any criminal activity, the order shall be recalled. 2. That they will appear before the trial Court in the month of January of every year till the appeal is decided. 3. That if the applicants changes the place of residence, they will give in writing their changed address to the trial Court as well as to the counsel in the High Court. 4. Similarly, if the sureties change their address(s),they will give in writing their changed address to the trial Court. 9. Misc. Application stands disposed of. 10. A copy of this order be sent to learned trial court through E- mail. (ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J PREETI VALECHA /16