[2025:RJ-JP:18936] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 2469/2024 1. Subah Singh Son Of Girraj, Resident Of Bhagora Police Station Weir, District Bharatpur (Raj) (At Present Confined In Central Jail, Sewar, Bharatpur) 2. Ramlal Son Of Girraj, Resident Of Bhagora Police Station Weir, District Bharatpur (Raj) (At Present Confined In Central Jail, Sewar, Bharatpur) 3. Gopal Son Iof Girraj, Resident Of Bhagora Police Station Weir, District Bharatpur (Raj) (At Present Confined In Central Jail, Sewar, Bharatpur) 4. Pappu @ Upadesh Son Of Girraj, Resident Of Bhagora Police Station Weir, District Bharatpur (Raj) (At Present Confined In Central Jail, Sewar, Bharatpur) 5. Mukesh Son Of Subah Singh, Resident Of Bhagora Police Station Weir, District Bharatpur (Raj) (At Present Confined In Central Jail, Sewar, Bharatpur) 6. Rammo Son Of Subah Singh, Resident Of Bhagora Police Station Weir, District Bharatpur (Raj) (At Present Confined In Central Jail, Sewar, Bharatpur) ----Petitioners Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent Connected With S.B. Criminal Appeal (Sb) No. 116/2025 Ramlal S/o Girraj, ----Petitioner Versus State of Rajasthan, through PP ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Brij Mohan Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vijay Singh Yadav, PP Mr. Pradeep Bishnoi for Mr. Ved Prakash Sogarwal [2025:RJ-JP:18936] (2 of 6) [SOSA-2469/2024] HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN Order 05/05/2025 1. The instant application for suspension of sentence is preferred by appellants-Subah Singh Son Of Girraj, Ramlal Son Of Girraj, Gopal Son of Girraj, Pappu @ Upadesh Son Of Girraj, Mukesh Son Of Subah Singh and Rammo Son Of Subah Singh in pending appeal filed aggrieved from order of conviction and sentence dated 18.12.2024 in Sessions Case No.121/2021 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Weir, Bharatpur whereby appellants were convicted for offence under Sections 148, 307/149, 326/149, 325/149, 324/149, 341 and 323/149 IPC and sentenced accordingly. 2. Learned counsel for the appellant while relying upon grounds of appeal submitted that appellants are innocent persons and they were falsely implicated by complainant party. He further submitted that the injuries sustained by injured Amar Singh is neither dangerous to life not sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of nature. He further placed reliance upon advice of Dr. Beena Manocha, Medical Officer Incharge, CSC Weir, Bharatpur placed on record. He further submitted that all the accused were released on bail during trial and a cross-case is also filed about the incident. He also submitted that the trial court without assessing about who wasaggressor party has convicted appellants. 3. Aforesaid contentions were opposed by learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for complainant. He submitted custody certificate and same is taken on record. Learned counsel for complainant while relying upon grounds of conviction has [2025:RJ-JP:18936] (3 of 6) [SOSA-2469/2024] submitted that injured has sustained grievous injury on vital part and same is dangerous to life. 4. Heard learned counsel for parties and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the record. 5. Learned counsel for appellant relied upon order dated 29.04.2025 in SOS application No.2489/2024 in Criminal Appeal No.2829/2024 passed by this Court. 6. On the basis of report Ex.P-2 submitted by PW-3 Kailash about assault on 08.08.2014, FIR No.195/2014 under Sections 143, 323, 341 and 336 IPC was registered at P.S. Weir on 08.08.2014. After investigation, police has filed charge-sheet against appellants under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 341, 324, 325, 307, 326 and 308 IPC. After framing charge, prosecution has examined 13 witnesses and exhibited 38 documents. Accused were examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and they have not submitted any defence evidence but exhibited three documents. Learned trial court has convicted appellants under Sections 148, 307/149, 326/149, 325/149, 324/149 IPC. The maximum sentence awarded to each of appellants is 10 years under Section 307/149 IPC. 7. A perusal of record indicated that a cross-case was also registered by Ramlal as FIR No.196/2017 at P.S. Weir. After investigation, police has filed charge-sheet against Amar Singh, Karan, Kailash and Anguri under Sections 323, 341, 324, 336 and 34 IPC. In cross-case, the trial court after considering the evidence has acquitted all four accused on 18.12.2024. Aggrieved from order of acquittal dated 18.12.2024 in sessions case [2025:RJ-JP:18936] (4 of 6) [SOSA-2469/2024] No.122/2021 (25/2015)(35/2018) a criminal appeal No.116/2015 is filed before this Court under the proviso to Section 372 Cr.P.C. 8. We have considered the statement of PW-2 Anguri Devi, PW- 3 Kailash, PW-1 Gamla, PW-6 Karan Singh and PW-7 Amar Singh. Medical jurist Dr. Beena Manocha was examined as PW-10 and we have considered her statement as well. The injuries sustained by PW-2 Anguri Devi and PW-1 Gamla were found to be simple in nature. Except injury No.1 upon injured Kailash, all were simple in nature, and the injury No.1 is found as grievous. All injuries upon PW-6 were found simple in nature but injury No.1 was cause by sharp edged weapon. As per PW-10, there were 12 injuries upon Amar Singh and injuries Nos. 1, 2, 4 and 11 were caused by sharp edged weapon but injury Nos. 1, 3, 4 and 12 are grievous in nature. We have considered injury reports of Amar Singh exhibited as Ex.P-6 and X-ray Ex.P-22 and 23. In the instant case, two articles (pharsa) were recovered. 9. The appellants were on bail during trial and they are in custody for quite some time. The opinion of PW-10 Dr. Beena Manocha as referred by learned counsel for appellants is part of record and submitted by police with charge-sheet but same is not exhibited. The opinion indicated that injury No.1 is not dangerous to life but in case the injury was not treated on time at higher centre then same may be dangerous to life. 10. At this stage, it is not possible for us to express any opinion on merits of the case particularly when a cross-case is also there, wherein an order of acquittal was recorded by trial court but disposal of appeal will take its own time, therefore it is appropriate to release appellants on bail. [2025:RJ-JP:18936] (5 of 6) [SOSA-2469/2024] 11. 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 appellant accused-Subah Singh Son Of Girraj, Ramlal Son Of Girraj, Gopal Son of Girraj, Pappu @ Upadesh Son Of Girraj, Mukesh Son Of Subah Singh and Rammo Son Of Subah Singh is suspended till disposal of appeal with the condition that each of them would executes 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 14.08.2025 and whenever ordered to do so till the disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated below:- 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 hey will appear before the trial Court in the month of January of every year till the appeal is decided. 3. That if the applicant(s) 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. [2025:RJ-JP:18936] (6 of 6) [SOSA-2469/2024] 12. Misc. Application stands disposed of. 13. A copy of this order be sent to learned trial court through E- mail. S.B. Criminal Appeal No.116/2025: 1. List along with S.B. Criminal Appeal No.3460/2024 in August, 2025. (ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J PREETI VALECHA /15-16