[2026:RJ-JP:751-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 556/2025 in D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 125/2025 1. Raghunath Alias Ragna Son of Ramdayal, R/o Village Samoli Police Station Kathoomar District Alwar (Raj.) (At Present Lodged In Central Jail Alwar) 2. Radheyshyam Son of Bhagwan Sahay, R/o Village Samoli Police Station Kathoomar District Alwar (Raj.) (At Present Lodged In Central Jail Alwar) 3. Ramsahay Son of Jaganlal, R/o Village Samoli Police Station Kathoomar District Alwar (Raj.) (At Present Lodged In Central Jail Alwar) 4. Mahesh Chand Sharma Son of Thakurlal, R/o Village Samoli Police Station Kathoomar District Alwar (Raj.) (At Present Lodged In Central Jail Alwar) 5. Madanlal Son of Ramdayal, R/o Village Samoli Police Station Kathoomar District Alwar (Raj.) (At Present Lodged In Central Jail Alwar) 6. Ramakant Son of Ramsahay, R/o Village Samoli Police Station Kathoomar District Alwar (Raj.) (At Present Lodged In Central Jail Alwar) 7. Khoob Chand Sharma Son of Ramdayal, R/o Village Samoli Police Station Kathoomar District Alwar (Raj.) (At Present Lodged In Central Jail Alwar) ----Appellants-accused Versus 1. The State of Rajasthan through Public Prosecutor 2. Brijlal Son of Bhanwarlal, R/o Village Samoli Tehsil Kathumar District Alwar ----Respondents-Complainant For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ashvin Garg For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shree Ram Dhakar, PP Mr. Gaurav Gupta Mr. Harendra Singh Mr. Jaswant Singh Rathore for complainant [2026:RJ-JP:751-DB] (2 of 4) [SOSA-556/2025] HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP TANEJA Order 09/01/2026 1. The accused-appellants have challenged the judgment dated 29.01.2025 passed by learned Special Judge, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Alwar in Sessions Case No. 118/2009 (CIS No. 1356/2014) whereby appellants have been convicted and sentenced for following offences:- Sr. No. Convicted for offence u/s. Sentence Awarded Default Sentence 1. 148 IPC Three years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs. 2000/- Two months rigorous imprisonment 2. 341 IPC One month simple imprisonment with fine of Rs.500/- Fifteen days simple imprisonment 3. 323 IPC One Year rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs. 1000/- One month rigorous imprisonment 4. 325 & 325/149 IPC Five years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.5000/- Three months rigorous imprisonment 5. 302/149 IPC Life imprisonment with fine of Rs. 20,000/- Six months rigorous imprisonment 6. 3(1)(x) SC/ ST Act One year rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.1000/- One months rigorous imprisonment 7. 3(1)(v) SC/ ST Act Life imprisonment with fine of Rs. 10,000/- Three months rigorous imprisonment Alongwith the appeal, appellants have filed this application for suspension of sentence. 2. Counsel for accused-appellants argued that the appellants have falsely been implicated in the present case; the main allegation of inflicting head injury to deceased Hatila is against Kesari Master, who was ordered to be impleaded as accused under [2026:RJ-JP:751-DB] (3 of 4) [SOSA-556/2025] Section 319 Cr.P.C. (Now Section 358 of the BNSS). As far as appellants are concerned, they have been convicted for offences under Section 302 IPC with the aid of Section 149 IPC and for offences under Sections 325 & 341 IPC. There is no concrete evidence against the appellants for such conviction; appellants were on bail during course of trial and never misused the liberty of bail; now appellants are in jail since date of impugned judgment dated 29.01.2025, hearing of criminal appeal will take its considerable time, hence, appellants be released and the application for suspension of sentence be allowed. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor as also counsel for complainant/victim opposed the SOS Application and contended that against appellants as well, allegations to inflict injury to other injured persons i.e. Palaram, Dalchand and Bishan, who received grievous injuries, have been levelled, hence, appellants may not be released. 4. Heard learned counsel for the accused-appellants, counsel for complainant as well as learned Public Prosecutor and perused the material available on record. 5. Considering the rival submission of both the parties and facts and circumstances of the case, we find that the appeal involves substantial questions of law, which are required to be heard in appeal; there is no allegation against appellants to inflict injuries on deceased; appellants were on bail during course of trial; hearing of appeal will take its own time, but without commenting on merits of the case, we deem it just and proper to suspend the sentence awarded to the accused-appellants. [2026:RJ-JP:751-DB] (4 of 4) [SOSA-556/2025] 6. Accordingly, the application for suspension of sentence is allowed and the sentence of appellants as well as fine amount shall remain suspended during pendency of the appeal, it is ordered that accused-appellants- (i) Raghunath @ Rugna S/o Ramdayal, (ii) Radheyshyam S/o Bhagwan Sahay, (iii) Ramsahay S/o Jaganlal, (iv) Mahesh Chand Sharma S/o Thakurlal, (v) Madanlal S/o Ramdayal, (vi) Ramakant S/o Ramsahay & (vii) Khoob Chand Sharma S/o Ramdayal shall be enlarged on bail provided each of them execute a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- along with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the trial court for their appearance in this Court on 10.02.2026 and as and when called upon to do so. (SANDEEP TANEJA),J (SUDESH BANSAL),J NITIN /26