[2025:RJ-JP:40232] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 6282/2025 Dharm Singh Son Of Mangilal, Resident Of Village Khanpur Meena , Police Station Baadi Sadar, District Dholpr Raj. ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Amitabh Jatav For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rishi Raj Sigh Rathore, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL Order 03/10/2025 1. Accused-petitioner has invoked inherent jurisdiction of High Court under Section 528 BNSS, 2023, by way of filing instant criminal miscellaneous petition, feeling aggrieved by the order dated 10.09.2025 passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge Baadi, District Dholpur, dismissing petitioner's application under Section 389 CrPC for suspension of sentence during course of hearing of the criminal appeal. 2. Counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner was convicted for offences under Sections 409, 420, 467, 468 & 471 of IPC vide judgment dated 31.07.2025 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate No.2, Baadi and was sentenced for a maximum period of seven years. The details of sentence awarded against the petitioner for each offence is indicated in the judgment itself. 3. Counsel for petitioner states that petitioner preferred criminal appeal against the judgment of conviction and sentence. The Appellate Court, before summoning record of trial Court and [2025:RJ-JP:40232] (2 of 2) [CRLMP-6282/2025] without considering the merits/ demerits of the case, dismissed the application for suspension of sentence of petitioner during course of hearing of the appeal vide impugned order dated 10.09.2025. 4. A perusal of impugned order dated 10.09.2025, prima facie reveals that the Appellate Court has directed to summon the record of trial Court and simultaneously has dismissed the application for seeking suspension of sentence filed under Section 389 CrPC, making an observation in a line that considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the application is hereby dismissed. 5. This Court does not appreciate the manner in which the application for suspension of sentence has been dismissed by the Appellate Court in slip shod manner, even without perusing the record of trial Court and without considering the merits/demerits of the case. However, instead of further commenting on the impugned order, the order deserves to be set aside merely on the ground of being non-speaking and unreasoned. 6. The Appellate Court is directed to consider the application for suspension of sentence on merits after summoning the record and perusal of the record and considering and discussing the case of petitioner-appellant on merits in accordance with law. 7. With aforesaid directions, the instant misc. petition is allowed and impugned order dated 10.09.2025, passed by Additional District and Sessions Judge Baadi, District Dholpur, is set aside. 8. Stay application and pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. (SUDESH BANSAL),J RONAK JAIMAN/60