Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2025 DAILYLAW 45503 (RAJ)

RAGHU ALIAS TANMAY S/O SH. MURLIDHAR v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

SOSA/1594/2025 · 2025-12-15

Bhuwan Goyal, Sudesh Bansal

Criminal Appealbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2025:RJ-JP:50464-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application No. 1594/2025 in D.B.Criminal Appeal No.350/2025 Raghu Alias Tanmay S/o Sh. Murlidhar, R/o Narsinghpura P.s. Atru Presently Residing At Sarhod P.s. Aru Dist. Baran (Raj) (Presently In Central Jail At Kota) ----Accused-Appellant Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor ----Respondent For Appellant(s) : Mr. Anurag Sharma with Mr. Akshat Sharma & Mr. Anoop Meena For Respondent(s) : Mr. Jitendra Singh Rathore, PP Mr. Naresh Gupta, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BHUWAN GOYAL Order 15/12/2025 1. The appellant has challenged the judgment and order dated 05.07.2025 passed in case No.01/2023 by Additional Sessions Judge, Atru, District Baran whereby the appellant has been convicted and sentenced under Section 302/34 of IPC to undergo life imprisonment as well as fine of Rs.20,000/- and six months' rigorous imprisonment in default. Alongwith the appeal, the appellant has filed this application for suspension of sentence. 2. Heard counsel for the accused appellant, learned Public Prosecutor and perused the record. [2025:RJ-JP:50464-DB] (2 of 2) [SOSA-1594/2025] 3. Taking into consideration that appellant has been convicted for an allegation to hold the deceased; the allegation of stabbing the deceased is against one juvenile, who has already been acquitted by the Juvenile Court vide judgment dated 01.09.2025; there is no recovery of any weapon from the appellant; the appellant is continuing in incarceration since 06.10.2022; hearing of the appeal obviously would take considerable time, hence, considering the entirety of facts and circumstances, this Court deems it just and proper to suspend the sentence of the appellant during course of the appeal. 4. Accordingly, the application for suspension of sentence is allowed and the sentence of appellant shall remain suspended during pendency of appeal, it is ordered that the accused- appellant Raghu Alias Tanmay S/o Sh. Murlidhar, shall be released on bail provided he execute a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- along with two sureties in the like amount each to the satisfaction of the trial court for his appearance in this court on 15.01.2026 and as and when called upon to do so. (BHUWAN GOYAL),J (SUDESH BANSAL),J Ritu/25