HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Suspension of Sentence Application No.1584/2025 in S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 2164/2025 1. Narayan Singh S/o Netram, Aged About 86 Years, R/o Hatiyapura, Police Station Kolari District Dholpur (At Present Accused Appellant Are Confined In Central Jail Dholpur) 2. Khyaliram S/o Narayan Singh, Aged About 52 Years, R/o Hatiyapura, Police Station Kolari District Dholpur (At Present Accused Appellant Are Confined In Central Jail Dholpur) 3. Ramniwas Son Of Narayan Singh, Aged About 47 Years, R/o Hatiyapura, Police Station Kolari District Dholpur (At Present Accused Appellant Are Confined In Central Jail Dholpur) 4. Ashok Kumar S/o Narayan Singh, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Hatiyapura, Police Station Kolari District Dholpur (At Present Accused Appellant Are Confined In Central Jail Dholpur) 5. Bhupendra Singh S/o Khyarliram, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Hatiyapura, Police Station Kolari District Dholpur (At Present Accused Appellant Are Confined In Central Jail Dholpur) 6. Pratap Singh S/o Tej Singh, Aged About 72 Years, R/o Hatiyapura, Police Station Kolari District Dholpur (At Present Accused Appellant Are Confined In Central Jail Dholpur) 7. Satyaprakash Son Of Khyaliram, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Hatiyapura, Police Station Kolari District Dholpur (At Present Accused Appellant Are Confined In Central Jail Dholpur) ----Appellants Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor ----Respondent (2 of 5) [SOSA-1584/2025] For Appellant(s) : Mr.Dharmendra Kumar Mr.Chitransh Saxena for Mr.Kapil Gupta For Respondent(s) : Mr.Amit Punia, Addl.GA-cum-PP Mr.Yogesh Singhal JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 09/10/2025 1. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the appellants have faced trial for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 323, 324, 325, 307 & 504 read with Section 149 of IPC, after trial they have been found guilty for the above stated offences vide the impugned order dated 14.07.2025. Counsel submits that none of the injured persons have sustained any grievous hurt or dangerous to life injury except PW-7 Arun Kumar who has sustained fracture on hand. Counsel submits that other injured Roshal Lal and Chedi Lal have sustained injuries on their head, but in X-Ray, no fracture has been found, hence, no injury has been found as grievous in nature. Counsel submits that the appellants were on bail during the course of trial and after conviction, they have been in custody and since the disposal of the instant appeal is bound to take time, therefore, the sentence awarded to the appellants by the Trial Court be suspended till disposal of the appeal. 2. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor as well as the counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant has opposed the arguments raised by counsel for the appellants and submits that (3 of 5) [SOSA-1584/2025] PW-4 Roshan Lal and PW-5 Chedi Lal have sustained injuries on their head by a sharp object which indicates the intention of the accused persons of attempting to cause the injured person’s death, hence, under these circumstances, the sentence awarded to the appellants be not suspended and their application seeking suspension of sentence be rejected. 3. Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned Public Prosecutor and perused the material available on record. 4. Considering the arguments put forward by counsel for the appellants and looking to the fact that the injured PW-7 Arun Kumar has sustained one fracture on his hand and rest of the injured persons have not sustained any grievous or dangerous to life injuries though the injuries suffered by them on their head which is a vital part of the body were found to be simple in nature. Looking to the fact that the appellants were on bail during the course of trial and looking to the fact that disposal of the appeal is likely to take time, this Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case for suspending the sentence awarded to the accused-appellants. 5. Accordingly, the application for suspension of sentence filed by the appellants under Section 430 BNSS, 2023 is allowed and the sentence awarded by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Dholpur in Sessions Case No.66/2019 vide judgment dated 14.07.2025 against the appellant (i) Narayan Singh S/o Netram, (ii) Khyaliram S/o Narayan Singh, (iii) Ramniwas S/o Narayan Singh, (iv) Ashok Kumar S/o Narayan Singh, (v) Bhupendra Singh S/o Khyarliram, (vi) Pratap Singh S/o Tej Singh, (vii) Satyaprakash S/o Khyaliram shall remain suspended till final disposal of the aforesaid appeal and subject to (4 of 5) [SOSA-1584/2025] the condition that the appellants shall deposit a fine amount as imposed by the Trial Court and they shall be released on bail provided each of them executes a personal bond for the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties of Rs.50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Judge for their appearance in this Court on 11.11.2025 and whenever ordered to do so till the disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated below:- 1. That they shall appear before the Trial Court in the month of January of every year till the appeal is decided. 2. That if the appellants change their place of residence, they will give in writing their changed address to the Trial Court as well as to the counsel in the High Court. 3. Similarly, if the sureties change their address(s) and/or mobile number, they will give in writing their changed address and/or mobile number to the Trial Court. 4. Appellant shall deposit the fine amount as imposed by the learned Trial Court. 5. In case, the appellants are found involved in committing and repeating the same offence again, the State/complainant would be at liberty to move application for cancellation of bail. 6. The learned Trial Court shall maintain the record of attendance of the accused-appellants in a separate file. Such file be registered as Criminal Misc. Case relating to original case in which the accused-appellants were tried and convicted. A copy of this order shall also be placed in that file for ready reference. Criminal Misc. Case file shall not be taken into account for statistical purpose relating to pendency and disposal of cases in the trial court. (5 of 5) [SOSA-1584/2025] 7. In case the said accused-appellants do not appear before the trial Court and/or commits any default, the learned Trial Judge shall report the matter to the High Court for cancellation of bail. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Aayush Sharma/27