[2026:RJ-JP:33764] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Misc. Suspension of Sentence Application No.442/2026 In S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 1558/2026 CNR: RJHC020767612026 | URN: CRLR / 2818U / 2026 Sunil Kumar Sharma S/o Shri Jagdish Prashad Sharma, R/o- C/o Dipak Gaur- 6-K-152, Shivaji Park Alwar, Rajasthan. (Accused/ Petitioner Is Confined In The Center Jail Alwar, Rajasthan) ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P. 2. Smt. Suman W/o Shri Jogendra, R/o 5-K-121 Shivaji Park Alwar, Raj. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ram Babu Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sudesh Kumar Saini, PP with Mr. Navdeep Singh, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI Order 21/08/2026 This suspension of sentence application has been filed by the applicant-petitioner alongwith the revision petition. Learned counsel for the applicant-petitioner submits that the applicant-petitioner was convicted by the learned Trial Court for the alleged offences and was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a maximum period of nine months, along with a fine, vide judgment dated 22.07.2024. Counsel further submits that, being aggrieved by the said judgment of conviction and order of sentence, the applicant-petitioner preferred an appeal [2026:RJ-JP:33764] (2 of 3) [SOSR-442/2026] before the learned Appellate Court. The learned Appellate Court, vide its order dated 22.07.2026, partly allowed the appeal and reduced the sentence as well as compensation amount. Counsel has annexed the Certificate under Rule 311 of High Court Rules, 1952 to the effect that the applicant was on bail during trial, and presently, he is behind the bars. Counsel further submits that the petitioner has not deposited the requisite 20% of the compensation amount before the learned Appellate Court. Counsel also submits that the judgment of conviction & sentence passed by the Trial Court, is totally based upon surmises and conjectures and the revision petition is likely to take long time to conclude. Hence, the sentence awarded to the applicant may be suspended during the pendency of the revision petition. Looking to the term of sentence, without commenting upon the merits of the case and considering the submissions made at bar, this Court deems it just and proper to suspend the sentence awarded to the applicant-petitioner. Accordingly, this application for suspension of sentence is allowed and it is ordered that the execution of sentence awarded to the applicant, namely Sunil Kumar Sharma S/o Shri Jagdish Prashad Sharma, by the learned Trial Court vide judgment dated 22.07.2024 and the learned Appellate Court vide judgment dated 22.07.2026, shall remain suspended during the pendency of the revision petition, provided he deposits Rs.2,50,000/- amount by way of Demand Draft in the name of Complainant-respondent No.2 and also furnishes a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- together with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each, to the satisfaction of the [2026:RJ-JP:33764] (3 of 3) [SOSR-442/2026] learned Trial Court with the stipulation that he shall appear before this Court on 22.09.2026 and thereafter, as and when he is called upon to do so. On deposit of the aforesaid amount, the same shall be released and disbursed to the complainant-respondent No.2 on an undertaking that if the applicant-petitioner succeeds in petition, same would be returned to the applicant-petitioner with interest @ 6% per annum within a period of two weeks from the disposal of the revision petition. (VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI),J 13/SAURABH