[2025:RJ-JP:39873] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 1164/2025 1. Amin Son Of Manna Mev, Aged About 36 Years, Ro Sahsan Ps Jurhara District Deeg (Raj) (Presently Confined In Central Jail Sewar Bharatpur) 2. Shariff Son Of Harun, Aged About 43 Years, R/o Kaltariya P.s. Jurhara District Deeg (Raj) Presently Confined In Central Jail Sewar Bharatpur) 3. Hanif Son Of Ishak, Aged About 35 Years, Ro Jhopdi P.s Jurhara District Deeg (Raj) (Presently Confined In Central Jail Sewar Bharatpur) 4. Sakir Son Of Raseed, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Jhodpi P.s. Jurhara District Deeg (Raj) (Presently Confined In Central Jail Sewar Bharatpur) ----Appellants Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p ----Respondent For Appellant(s) : Mr. Vishnu Kumar Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Naresh Kumar Gupta, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAMIL KUMAR MATHUR Order 26/09/2025 1. The appellants have been convicted by the learned Additional Session Judge, Kaman, District Bharatpur, vide judgment dated 25.04.2025 in Sessions Case No.12/2015 for the offences under Section 3/8 of RBA Act and sentenced for five years rigorous imprisonment, under Section 4/8 of RBA Act, two years rigorous imprisonment respectively with default stipulation. [2025:RJ-JP:39873] (2 of 3) [SOSA-1164/2025] 2. Being aggrieved the appellants have preferred this appeal. Pending disposal of the appeal, by way of present application under Section 430 of BNSS, 2023 the appellants seeks suspension of sentence and release on bail. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants has submitted that the trial court has committed illegality and irregularity in appreciating the evidence adduced by the prosecution in a right perspective. He further submitted that all the appellants are in incarceration since above five months and no criminal antecedents have been recorded by the prosecution. The hearing of the appeal is not likely to be concluded in near future. Therefore, the application for suspension of sentence may be allowed. 4. The learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the application for suspension of sentence. 5. I have heard the contentions of the learned counsel for the appellants and learned Public Prosecutor on the application for suspension of sentence and perused the material available on record. 6. Taking into consideration all the facts and circumstances of the case, the period of sentence awarded and the fact that disposal of the appeal is likely to take considerable time but without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am inclined to suspend the sentence of the appellants-Amin Son Of Manna Mev, Shariff Son Of Harun, Hanif Son Of Ishak and Sakir Son Of Raseed. 7. It is, therefore, ordered that the sentence of the appellants shall remain suspended till disposal of the appeal and they shall be released on bail, provided they furnishes a personal bond in the [2025:RJ-JP:39873] (3 of 3) [SOSA-1164/2025] sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000/- each, to the satisfaction of the trial Court to the effect that they shall appear before this Court on 31.10.2025 and as and when called upon to do so. 8. The application is accordingly disposed of. (PRAMIL KUMAR MATHUR),J Arun/23