[2025:RJ-JP:25042] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 1089/2025 In S.B. Criminal Appeal No.1441/2025 Gurmel Singh @ Heera Singh S/o Kulwant Singh, R/o Mangli Kalan, Police Station Hindauli District Bundi (Raj) (At Present Confined In District Jail Bundi) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. A.K. Gupta, senior advocate with Mr. Gaurav Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Devi Singh, PP Mr. Yuvraj Singh HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN Order 07/07/2025 1. The instant application for suspension of sentence is preferred by appellant - Gurmel Singh @ Heera Singh S/o Kulwant Singh in pending appeal filed aggrieved from order of conviction and sentence dated 21.05.2025 in Sessions Case (CIS) No.05/2015 passed by learned Special Judge (SC/ST (POA) Act Cases), Bundi whereby appellant was convicted for offence under Sections 323/34, 325/34,326/34 and 307/34 IPC and sentenced accordingly. 2. Learned senior advocate for the appellant while relying upon grounds of appeal submitted that appellant was originally not forwarded to face trial but later was called to face trial in [2025:RJ-JP:25042] (2 of 4) [SOSA-1089/2025] proceedings, which was instituted by complainant party, which threatened to take possession of land from accused. He also submitted that the facts narrated in Ex.P-2 report clearly indicated that the complainant party armed with deadly weapon with several persons have assaulted the accused party to take forcible possession of agricultural land. He also referred the material on record and submitted that there is a previous animosity between the parties and on the basis of initial complaint, a case under Sections 107 and 151 Cr.P.C. was registered and further released appellant on bail. He further submitted that afterwards, a case under Section 307 IPC was registered. Learned senior advocate has further referred evidence of PW-11 Nandlal, PW-15 Badrilal and PW-17 Gyanchand and submitted that the evidence clearly suggest that it was a bailable case and case of common intention is not proved. He further submitted that appellant was on bail during trial and he has not misused the liberty granted to him. He also referred cross-examination of injured and medial experts and submitted that the contradictions and discrepancies are sufficient to discard the case of prosecution, as there is no evidence to show direct involvement of appellant. At last, he submitted that disposal of appeal will take its own time and there is no criminal antecedents against the appellant. 3. Aforesaid contentions were opposed by learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for complainant. He submitted custody certificate along with report received from concerned police station and same are taken on record. 4. Heard learned senior advocate for appellant, learned counsel for complainant and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the record. [2025:RJ-JP:25042] (3 of 4) [SOSA-1089/2025] 5. On the basis of report, Ex.P-8 filed by Pramod Kumar, FIR No. 170/2009 at P.S. Hindoli, Dist. Bundi was registered. After investigation, police has filed charge-sheet against Kulwant, Balwant and Jaswant but kept pending against appellant under Section 173(8) of Cr.P.C. Later a charge-sheet has been filed against appellant. After framing charge, prosecution has examined 19 witnesses and exhibited 16 documents. The accused was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and examined DW-1 and DW- 2 as defence evidence and exhibited 7 documents. Learned trial court has convicted appellant under Sections 323/34, 324/34, 325/34, 326/34 and 307/34 IPC. The maximum sentence awarded to appellant is 7 years. 6. The record clearly suggest that initially a charge-sheet was filed against three persons and according to learned senior advocate for appellant, an appeal has already been filed whetein these accused Kulwant, Balwant and Jaswant were released on bail. The conviction order dated 05.09.2012 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge No.1, Bundi in sessions case No.20/2011 is also considered by this court. 7. We have considered the statement of PW-2 Amod Sharma, PW-3 Sandeep, PW-4 Pappu, PW-6 Vinod Kumar and police officers PW-11 Nandlal, PW-12 Laxman Gaur, PW-13 Ramlal, PW-15 Badrilal and PW-17 Gyanchand. Also considered the medical evidence of PW-9 Dr. Dharamraj and PW-19 Dr. P.K. Tiwari. 8. At this stage, it is not possible for us to express any opinion on merits of the case, but looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, it is a fit case to enlarge appellant on bail. [2025:RJ-JP:25042] (4 of 4) [SOSA-1089/2025] 9. Therefore, without expressing any opinion on merits, I am of considered view that it is a fit case wherein appellant can be enlarged on bail. The application under Section 430(1) B.N.S.S. is allowed and sentence of appellant accused-Gurmel Singh @ Heera Singh S/o Kulwant Singh is suspended till disposal of appeal with the condition that he 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 his appearance in this court on 29.10.2025 and whenever ordered to do so till the disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated below:- 1. After release of appellant on bail, he will not indulge in any criminal activity and if it is found that he is involved in any criminal activity, the order shall be recalled. 2. That he 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, he will give in writing his 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. 10. Misc. Application stands disposed of. 11. A copy of this order be sent to learned trial court through E- mail. (ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J PREETI VALECHA /44