[2025:RJ-JP:22692-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 548/2025 in D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 120/2025 Ballu Alias Balram Son Of Shivcharan @ Ramcharan, Aged About 45 Years, Resident Of Hadoti Ps Sapotra District Karauli (Raj) (Present Confined In Sub Jail Gangapur City) ----Petitioner Versus The State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. D.K. Dixit For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sudesh Saini, Addl. GA with Mr. Vibhor Arora HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BHUWAN GOYAL Order 30/05/2025 PER BHUWAN GOYAL J. : 1. This application for suspension of sentence under Section 430 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by accused-applicant being aggrieved by the Judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 15.02.2025 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge No. 1, Gangapur City in Sessions Case No. 64/2014, vide which accused-applicant has been convicted and sentenced as under :- Offence Sentence Fine Default sentence u/s 302/120-B IPC Life imprisonment Rs. 20,000/- 6 months additional [2025:RJ-JP:22692-DB] (2 of 4) [SOSA-548/2025] RI u/s 201/120-B IPC 3 years’ RI Rs. 5,000/- 3 months additional RI Both sentences are ordered to run concurrently 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Public Prosecutor and perused the record of the case. 3. Learned counsel for accused-applicant submits that applicant has been falsely enroped in this case. There is no eye-witness of the incident of murder of deceased Suman alias Mala and entire prosecution case is based on circumstantial evidence. The witness of last seen evidence viz. P.W. 6 – Ramesh has not supported prosecution story and declared hostile. The material prosecution witnesses also do not support the prosecution story. He further submits that sentence awarded to similarly situated co-accused Smt. Kadi has already been suspended by a coordinate Bench of this Court and the case against the applicant is on similar footings. He also submits that accused-applicant was on bail during trial. The hearing of the appeal is likely to consume long time. He, therefore, prays that sentence awarded to accused-applicant may be suspended and he may also be released on bail. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposes application for suspension of sentence and submits that the prosecution has proved its case against accused-applicant beyond all reasonable doubt. Therefore, it has been prayed that this application for SOS may be rejected. 5 Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and considered arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties [2025:RJ-JP:22692-DB] (3 of 4) [SOSA-548/2025] and the fact that sentence awarded to similarly situated co- accused Smt. Kadi has been suspended by a coordinate Bench and the applicant was on bail during trial, there are no criminal antecedents and hearing of appeal is likely to take time, without commenting upon merits/demerits of the case, this court is of the opinion that it is a fit case for suspending the sentences awarded to the accused-applicant. 6. 6. Accordingly, instant application for suspension of sentence filed by the accused-applicant under Section 430 of B.N.S.S., 2023 is allowed and it is ordered that sentence awarded by the Additional Sessions Judge No. 1, Gangapur City vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 15.02.2025 in Sessions Case No. 64/2014 against accused-applicant – Ballu Alias Balram son of Shivcharan @ Ramcharan shall remain suspended till final disposal of aforesaid appeal and she shall be released on bail provided she executes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties of Rs.50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the trial Judge for her appearance in this court on 02.07.2025 and whenever ordered to do so till disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated below:- 1. After release of the accused-applicant, he shall not indulge in any criminal activity and if it is found that he is involved in any criminal activity, instant 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 changes 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. [2025:RJ-JP:22692-DB] (4 of 4) [SOSA-548/2025] 4. Similarly, if the sureties change their address(s), they will give in writing their changed address to the trial Court. (BHUWAN GOYAL),J (NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J INDER/70