[2025:RJ-JP:17906] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Misc Suspension of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 243/2025 In S.B. Criminal Appeal No.297/2025 1. Deep Singh @ Deepak Yogi S/o Gyanchand Yogi, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Chhipabadod Khedi Thana Chhipabadod District Baran At Present House No. 913, Vinoba Bhave Nagar Police Thana Anantpura Kota (At Present Confined At Central Jail Kota) 2. Ram Yogi S/o Gyanchand Yogi, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Chhipabadod Khedi Thana Chhipabadod District Baran At Present House No. 913, Vinoba Bhave Nagar Police Thana Anantpura Kota (At Present Confined At Central Jail Kota) ----Petitioners Versus State of Rajasthan, Through P.p ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Abdul Kalam Khan For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vijay Singh Yadav, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN Order 28/04/2025 1. This suspension of sentence application was preferred on behalf of accused appellants-applicants (1) Deep Singh @ Deepak Yogi S/o Gyanchand Yogi and (2) Ram Yogi S/o Gyanchand Yogi (hereinafter referred to as ‘the appellants’) in pending appeal filed aggrieved from judgment of conviction and sentence dated 23.01.2025 in Sessions Case No.64/2015 (394/2015) passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge No.4, Kota whereby the accused appellant No.1 Deep Singh @ Deepak Yogi was convicted and [2025:RJ-JP:17906] (2 of 5) [SOSA-243/2025] sentenced under Sections 341, 323/34, 307 and accused appellant No.2 Ram Yogi S/o Gyanchand Yogi was convicted and sentenced under Sections 341, 323 and 307/34 of IPC. Maximum sentence awarded to the appellants is seven years. 2. Learned counsel for the appellants has referred the statement of PW-1 injured and submitted that as per him accused Deep Singh @ Deepak Yogi has assaulted with knife and Ramu by Rod. He further submits that no evidence other than interested witness has supported the case of prosecution. He also submits that a case was registered by sister of appellants accused prior to present case, wherein she named injured and also his friend who assaulted her. He further submits that even prior to this, another case was registered for mobile theft. He also submitted that Medical Jurist PW-10 Dr. Surendra Meena, who examined injured Rajender, has opined that injury No.2 is caused by deadly weapon but opinion was reserved till note of surgeon. He also submits that on basis of surgical notes, this injury was found dangerous but surgeon was not examined by prosecution. He also referred the cross-examination of Investigating Officer PW-2 Hanuman Singh and submitted that the recovery of knife is from open place. He also referred the recovery memo and cross-examination of witnesses and submitted that the recovered knife is not having a sharp edge. He further referred the evidence and submitted that evidence of PW-1 Rajendra @ Bittu and PW-6 Mahavir Rathore is not trustworthy as both were named by sister as an accused in FIR No.107/2015 registered prior to present case. At last, He submits that the appellants were on bail during trial and they were [2025:RJ-JP:17906] (3 of 5) [SOSA-243/2025] not misused the liberty granted to them and disposal of appeal will take its own time. 3. Aforesaid contentions were opposed by learned Public Prosecutor. Learned Public Prosecutor has submitted custody certificates along with criminal antecedents of the accused appellants and same are taken on record. 4. Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the record. 5. On basis of statement of PW-1 Rajender @ Bittu recorded on 25.03.2015 about incident of 25.03.2015, FIR No.109/2015 was registered at Police Station Anantpura, District Kota City under Sections 341, 323, 324 and 34 IPC. After investigation, police has filed charge-sheet against both the appellants under Sections 323, 341, 324 and 307/34 IPC. During trial, prosecution has examined as many as 11 witnesses and exhibited 13 documents. The accused were examined under Section 313 CrPC and they opted not to submit any defence evidence. After the trial both the accused were convicted and sentenced. 6. The appellants accused Ram Yogi and Deep Singh @ Deepak were released on bail in pursuant to orders dated 23.06.2015 and 27.06.2015 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Kota. We have gone through the cross-examination of PW-1, particularly, about registration of case by sister of accused prior to registration of the present case. The admission also indicate that registration of a previous case by Deep Singh @ Deepak against PW-1 Rajendra @ Bittu in relation to theft of mobile. Fact of previous animosity was admitted during cross-examination of PW-2. [2025:RJ-JP:17906] (4 of 5) [SOSA-243/2025] 7. We have gone through the statement of PW-10 Surendra Meena and also gone through the recovery memo of article (knife) and the place from where the same has been recovered. At this stage, it is not possible for us to express any opinion on merits of the case but having considered the fact that disposal of appeal will take its own time and both the appellants were on bail during trial, therefore, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case and in view of discussion made hereinabove, the instant Criminal Misc. Suspension of Sentence Application is hereby allowed and it is ordered that sentence of appellants-applicants accused (1) Deep Singh @ Deepak Yogi S/o Gyanchand Yogi and (2) Ram Yogi S/o Gyanchand Yogi is suspended till disposal of appeal with the condition that each of them would execute a personal bond in the sum of ₹50,000/- with two sureties of ₹25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for their appearance in this Court on 05.08.2025 and whenever ordered to do so till the disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated below:- 1. That the appellants accused shall not indulge in any criminal activity and not repeat crime of any nature during period of suspension of sentence/bail. 2. That the appellants will appear before the Trial Court in the month of January of every year till the appeal is decided. 3. That if the appellants change the place of residence, they will give in writing their changed [2025:RJ-JP:17906] (5 of 5) [SOSA-243/2025] 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. 8. In case, the applicants have violated any condition then the order of suspension of sentence shall be recalled and cancelled. 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 MR/32