[2026:RJ-JP:6781] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.63/2026 (Suspension of Sentence) IN S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 251/2026 Ramkesh, Son Of Lakshman, Aged About 40 Years, Resident Of Hajya Ka Baas, Tehsil Dausa, District Dausa, At Present Technician, Third Senior Section Engineer, Electricity/north-Western Railway, Nwr Malviya Nagar, Jaipur Head Office, Jaipur (At Present Confined In Central Jail, Dausa) ----Accused-Petitioner Versus 1. State of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor 2. Kamlesh Kumar, Son Of Bhagirath, Resident Of Village Prempura, Tehsil Dausa, District Dausa ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Abhi Goyal, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Jaiprakash Tiwari, Public Prosecutor Mr. Sanjay Verma, Advocate HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI Order 12/02/2026 Instant application for suspension of sentence has been preferred on behalf of petitioner under Section 438 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 alongwith the revision petition seeking suspension of the sentence awarded by the Court of ld. Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, No.1, Dausa District Dausa, vide judgment dt.16.09.2025 in Criminal Regular Case No.2452/2023, whereby the petitioner was convicted for the alleged offence(s) & sentenced to undergo the maximum period of one-year simple imprisonment with fine. The said conviction & sentence were confirmed by the Court of ld. Sessions Judge, Dausa District Dausa, vide judgment dated 28.01.2026 in Criminal Appeal No.132/2025. [2026:RJ-JP:6781] (2 of 3) [CRLR-251/2026] Learned counsel for the petitioner has annexed the Certificate under Rule 311 of High Court Rules, 1952 to the effect that the petitioner is in judicial custody since 28.01.2026. Counsel also submits that the judgment of conviction & sentence passed by the Courts below, are totally based upon surmises and conjectures and the revision petition is likely to take long time to conclude. Hence, the sentence awarded to the petitioner should be suspended during the pendency of the revision petition. Learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the complainant-respondent No.2 have vehemently opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner. 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 petitioner during the pendency of the revision. Accordingly, this application for suspension of sentence is allowed and it is ordered that the execution of sentence awarded to the petitioner, namely Ramkesh son of Lakshman by the ld. Trial Court vide judgment dated 16.09.2025 and affirmed by the ld. Appellate Court vide judgment dated 28.01.2026, shall remain suspend during the pendency of the revision petition, provided he shall deposit 50 per- cent of the cheque amount i.e. Rs.3,00,000/- by way of Demand Draft in the name of respondent No.2 and shall also furnish a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- together with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each, to the satisfaction of the ld. Trial Court with the stipulation that he shall appear before this Court on 12.03.2026 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 respondent No.2 on an undertaking that if [2026:RJ-JP:6781] (3 of 3) [CRLR-251/2026] the petitioner succeeds in petition, same would be returned to the petitioner with interest @ 6% per annum within a period of two weeks from the disposal of the revision petition. A copy of this order be sent to the concerned trial Court for compliance. (VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI),J ASHOK