[2026:RJ-JP:7328-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 1548/2024 IN D. B. Criminal Appeal No. 284/2024 Noranglal S/o Malaram @ Malaji, Aged About 61 Years, R/o Ward No 14 Mohalla Naykan, Opposite Ajit Hospital, Khetari, P.s. Khetari, District Jhunjhunu (Rajasthan) (At Present Confined In Central Jail Bikaner ) ----Appellant-Accused Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Amit Puri with Mr. Naveen Verma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rhishi Raj Singh Rathore, PP with Mr. Vinod Sharma HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN Order 16/02/2026 The suspension of sentence application under Section 430 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the accused-applicant (for brevity, “the applicant”) alongwith the appeal. The applicant has been convicted and sentenced by the learned Additional Session Judge No. 2, Khetari District Jhunjhunu in Sessions Case No.44/2023 (CIS No.SC/09/2020) under Section 302 of IPC for life imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 10,000/-; in default, six months additional rigorous imprisonment. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that his conviction has been recorded in much as, he could not explain the death of his wife-Smt Yasodha with whom he had slept under a roof in the fateful night invoking Section 106 of the Indian Evidence Act, [2026:RJ-JP:7328-DB] (2 of 2) [SOSA-1548/2024] 1872 whereas, being husband and wife, their sleeping together in a room in the fateful night was natural. He further submits that prosecution has not been able to establish his motive behind the crime. Learned counsel contends that his conviction has been recorded only on probability without any proof.. He, therefore, prays that his suspension of sentence application be allowed. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposed the submissions and prayed for dismissal of the application. Heard. Considered. From the material available on record, it is reflected that the applicant was seen last in night with his wife in a room and she was found to be murdered in the morning. Testimony of their children reflects that they were not on good terms, used to quarrel badly for last about two monthly and the applicant used to doubt the she had illicit relationship with their son. Their daughter Hemlata (PW-3) has also claimed that the applicant made extra- judicial confession before her. In view thereof, we, prima facie, find no error in the order passed by the learned trial Court recording the conviction of the applicant invoking Section 106 of the Indian Evidence Act. Looking to the gravity and nature of accusation against the applicant, we are not inclined to allow the suspension of sentence application. Accordingly, the suspension of sentence application is dismissed. (SAMEER JAIN),J (MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL),J Pooja /149