[2025:RJ-JP:42166] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Misc. SOS Application No. 190/2025 In S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 873/2025 Juvenile ‘M’ S/o Jagdish, Juvenile Through Father And Natural Guardian Shri Jagdish S/o Late Shri Nathuram Aged 55 Years Resident Of Village Chatarpura Tehsil Sanganer, Police Station Sez District Jaipur (Raj) (At Present Detained In Juvenile Home Jaipur) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Madhav Mitra-Sr. Advocate assisted by Ms. Jaya Mitra Ms. Manisha Meena For Respondent(s) : Mr. Amit Punia-Addl.G.A cum PP Mr. Anish Bhadala JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 15/10/2025 1. This criminal misc. suspension of sentence application has been filed by the applicant along with the criminal revision petition. 2. Counsel for the applicant-petitioner submits that the alleged offence took place on 19.04.2016 while the deceased has passed away on 12.12.2016 on account of Septicemia occurred due to injury sustained by him. Counsel submits that as per the FIR, the allegation of causing head injury is against Jagdish while common general allegation have been levelled against the petitioner. [2025:RJ-JP:42166] (2 of 4) [CRLR-873/2025] Though the version was improved during the course of trial. Counsel submits that material witnesses PW 5, 13, 15, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24,31, 32, 33 and 36 have not supported the version of prosecution, hence they have been declared as hostile. Counsel submits that the Juvenile Justice Board has found the petitioner guilty for the offence under Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 325, 307 and 302 IPC and sentenced him to undergo two years imprisonment. Counsel submits that aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment dated 24.08.2022, an appeal was preferred by the petitioner before the Children’s Court, Jaipur Metropolitan -II, however the same was rejected vide judgment dated 29.04.2025. Counsel submits that out of total sentence of two years, the petitioner has already served substantial sentence during trial and after pronouncement of the judgment i.e. 29.04.2025. Counsel submits that the disposal of the instant revision petition is bound to take its time, therefore, the sentence awarded to the petitioner be suspended till final disposal of the revision petition. 3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor as well as counsel for the complainant opposed the prayer and submitted that the material witnesses PW-2, 6, 8, 11 and 17 have deposed against the petitioner which indicates the involvement of the petitioner in the aforesaid occurrence and after trial, the petitioner has been found guilty by both the Courts below, hence the petitioner does not deserve any indulgence of bail and the application of suspension of sentence is liable to be rejected. 4. Heard and considered the submissions made at the Bar and perused the material available on record. [2025:RJ-JP:42166] (3 of 4) [CRLR-873/2025] 5. Considering the arguments put forward by learned counsel for the petitioner and looking to the fact that the deceased has passed away after eight months of the alleged occurrence and the material witnesses PW 5, 13, 15, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24,31, 32, 33 and 36, have not supported the prosecution case, hence they have been declared as hostile and the petitioner has already served substantial sentence during the trial and after pronouncement of the judgment i.e. 29.04.2025 and also considering the fact that the disposal of the revision petition is bound to take its time, hence, without making comments on the merits and demerits of the case, this Court deems it just and proper to suspend the sentence of the petitioner till disposal of the revision petition. 6. Accordingly, the instant suspension of sentence application is allowed and it is ordered that the execution of sentence awarded to the applicant – “M” shall remain suspended during pendency of the criminal revision and he be released on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) together with two sureties of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) each, to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court with the stipulation that he shall appear before this Court on 17.11.2025 and whenever ordered to do so, till the disposal of the revision petition on the conditions indicated below:- 1. That he shall appear before the trial Court in the month of January of every year till the revision petition is decided. 2. That if the applicant changes the place of residence and mobile number, he will give in writing his changed address and mobile number to the trial Court as well as to the counsel in the High Court. 3. Similarly, if the sureties change their address(s), they will give in writing their changed address to the trial Court. [2025:RJ-JP:42166] (4 of 4) [CRLR-873/2025] 4. Applicant-petitioner shall deposit fine amount as imposed by the learned trial Court. 5. In case the applicant-petitioner is found involved in committing and repeating the same offence again, the State/complainant would be at liberty to move application for cancellation of bail. 7. The learned trial Court shall maintain the record of attendance of the accused-applicant in a separate file. Such file be registered as Criminal Misc. Case relating to the original case in which the accused-appellant was tried and convicted. A copy of this order shall also be placed in that file for ready reference. Criminal Misc. file shall not be taken into account for statistical purpose relating to pendency and disposal of cases in the trial court. 8. In case the said accused-applicant does not appear before the Trial Court and commits any default, the learned Trial Judge shall report the matter to the High Court for cancellation of bail. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Ashu/12