[2026:RJ-JP:461] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Misc 2nd Suspension Of Sentence Application No. 2445/2025 in S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 2544/2024 Ibra @ Ibran Son Of Mamrej, Aged About 24 Years, R/o Somka, Police Station Pahadi, District Bharatpur (Raj.) (At Present Confined At Central Jail, Alwar) ----appellant Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p. ----Respondent For appellant(s) : Mr. Jiya Ur Rahman For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vijay Singh Yadav, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN Order 07/01/2026 1. The second application for suspension of sentence is preferred by appellant - Ibra @ Ibran Son Of Mamrej, in pending appeal filed aggrieved from order of conviction and sentence dated 31.08.2024 in Sessions Case No. 46/2018 (32/2014) passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge no.2, Kishangarh Bas, District Alwar whereby appellant was convicted for offence under Sections 148, 341, 342, 395, 323 IPC and sentenced accordingly. 2. Learned counsel for the appellant while relying upon grounds of appeal submitted that without observing principle of law learned trial court has arrived at a conclusion of conviction. He further submitted that learned trial court has overlooked material [2026:RJ-JP:461] (2 of 5) [SOSA-2445/2025] contradictions and discrepancies, which goes to root of the matter. He further submitted that the entire case of prosecution rests on testimony of interested witness and no independent witness was examined to corroborate the story of prosecution. 3. Learned Counsel for the appellant submits that the SOS application of the present appellant was dismissed on 29-07-2025, but at the same time, the SOS application of Handu @ Devo @ Devilal was allowed by the Hon’ble Court. He further submitted that the SOS application of the present appellant was dismissed only on the ground that there are criminal antecedents against the appellant. He further submitted that the maximum sentence awarded to the present appellant is 7 years and, out of this period, the appellant has already undergone more than 4 years and 2 months so, he is entitled to be released on bail only on the ground that the appellant has already served a large part of the sentence awarded to the appellant. 3. Aforesaid contentions were opposed by learned Public Prosecutor. He submitted custody certificate and same is taken on record. 4. Heard learned counsel for appellant and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the record. 5. Aggrieved from the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 31-08-2024, a criminal appeal is preferred by the present appellant and co-accused Handu @ Devo @ Devilal. This Court, while considering the SOS application of Handu @ Devo @ Devilal on 29-07-2025, has allowed the SOS application, but dismissed the SOS application of the present appellant as withdrawn. [2026:RJ-JP:461] (3 of 5) [SOSA-2445/2025] 6. On the basis of report, Ex.P/1 filed by PW-1 Sapan Mohan Garg, FIR No. 98/2014 was registered at P.S. Kishangarh Bas, under Section 382 IPC and after investigation, police has filed charge-sheet against appellants- Ibra @ Ibran, Handu @ Devo @ Devilal and Adil thereafter supplementary charge-sheet was also filed against other persons. After framing charge, prosecution has examined 20 witnesses and exhibited 59 documents. The accused was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and they have not submitted any defence evidence. Learned trial court has convicted appellant- Ibra @ Ibran Son Of Mamrej under Sections 148, 341, 342, 395, 323 IPC. The maximum sentence awarded to appellant is 7 years. 7. The present appellant was on bail during trial, but the record submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor has suggested that 17 criminal cases were registered against the present appellant from 2011 to 2024. The record suggests that, in the last 10 years, only 2 criminal cases were registered against the appellant. The custody certificate submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor suggests that the appellant has also served 4 years, 2 months and 26 days against the awarded maximum sentence of 7 years. Counsel for the appellant has also referred on record 7 cases disposed of against the appellant. He also submitted that the appellant is not having details of some of the cases already disposed of by the Courts. Here, in this case, the appellant has already served more than 50% of the sentence and the co- accused has already been enlarged on SOS application. 8. At this stage, it is not possible for us to express any opinion on merits of the case, but considering period of custody, as [2026:RJ-JP:461] (4 of 5) [SOSA-2445/2025] maximum sentence awarded to present appellant is seven years and looking the facts and circumstances of the case, it is a fit case to enlarge appellant on bail. 9. Therefore, without expressing any opinion on merits, I am of considered view that it is a fit case wherein appellant can be enlarged on bail. The application under Section 430(1) B.N.S.S. is allowed and sentence of appellant accused - Ibra @ Ibran Son Of Mamrej, is suspended till disposal of appeal with the condition that he would executes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for his appearance in this court on 16.03.2026 and whenever ordered to do so till the disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated below:- 1. After release of appellant on bail, he will not indulge in any criminal activity and if it is found that he is involved in any criminal activity, the order shall be recalled. 2. On every 1st and 3rd Tuesday the appellant accused will mark his attendance before concerned police station till disposal of the appeal. 3. That he will appear before the trial Court in the month of January of every year till the appeal is decided. 4. That if the applicant changes the 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. [2026:RJ-JP:461] (5 of 5) [SOSA-2445/2025] 5. Similarly, if the sureties change their address(s),they will give in writing their changed address to the trial Court. 6. In case, the applicant has violated any condition, then the order of SOS shall be recalled and cancelled. 10. Misc. Application stands disposed of. 11. A copy of this order be sent to learned trial court through E- mail. (ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J CHETNA BEHRANI /4