[2026:RJ-JP:20476-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Criminal Misc. 2nd Suspension Of Sentence Application No. 1948/2025 in D. B. Criminal Appeal No.158/2024 Rajesh Kumar @ Poliya S/o Shri Ramchandra, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Kidwana Police Station Buhana District Jhunjhunu. (Raj.) (At Present The Accused Appellant Is Confined In The Jail, Jhunjhunu) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor ----Respondent Connected With D.B. Criminal Misc. 2nd Suspension Of Sentence Application No. 1379/2025 in D. B. Criminal Appeal No.158/2024 Ajay Kumar @ Shyodan, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Kidwana Police Station Surajgarh District Jhunjhunu (Raj) (At Present The Accused Appellant Are Confined In The District Jail Jhunjhunu) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Manish Gupta, Advocate. Mr. Upendra Singh, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Jaswant Singh Rathore, Advocate. For Respondent(s) For Complainant : : Mr. Rajesh Choudhary, Government Advocate-cum-Additional Advocate General assisted by Mr. Vinod Kumar Gupta, Advocate and Ms. Neha Goyal, Advocate. Mr. Vinay Pal Yadav, Advocate. [2026:RJ-JP:20476-DB] (2 of 4) [SOSA-1948/2025] HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJEET SINGH HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BHUWAN GOYAL Order 14/05/2026 1. The matter is heard on the second applications seeking suspension of sentence. 2. Counsel for the accused-applicants submits that the applicants-accused have been convicted and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC read with Section 149 IPC. 3. Counsel for the accused-applicants has annexed the certificate under Rule 311 (3) of the Rajasthan High Court Rules to the effect that accused-applicants are in judicial custody. Counsel for the applicants-accused submits that the applicants-accused have been falsely implicated in this matter. Counsel further submits that the accused-applicants have served the sentence for a period of around seven years and the appeal is not likely to be heard in near future. It is accordingly prayed that the sentence imposed upon the applicants-accused be suspended during the pendency of the appeal. 4. This Court had previously adjudicated upon and dismissed the first application for suspension of sentence preferred by the applicants-accused Ajay Kumar @ Shoydan and Rajesh Kumar @ Poliya by a reasoned order dated 12.09.2024. The said order reads, inter alia, as follows: “ Heard on suspension of sentence application. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the accused - pplicants have been falsely involved in this matter. Learned counsel further submits that the [2026:RJ-JP:20476-DB] (3 of 4) [SOSA-1948/2025] alleged incident pertains to two places; at one place there was a fight between the accused- applicants and deceased where eye witness Ashish Kumar was present, thereafter Ashish Kumar left the said place and the deceased ran away on his motor cycle and at the second place, the body of the deceased was found. Learned Government Advocate assisted by learned counsel for the complainant opposed the suspension of sentence application and submitted that during pendency of trial, the bail application filed on behalf of all the accused-applicants was allowed by this Court and they were released on bail, however, their bail was cancelled by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Criminal Appeal No.1843/2019; Mahipal Vs. Rajesh Kumar @ Polia & Anr. along with other connected appeals vide order dated 05.12.2019. They further submitted that according to statement of Doctor (PW- 22), 27 injuries were found on the body of the deceased, out of which 7 injuries were found on the head of the deceased and according to the statement of eye witness Ashish Kumar (PW-13), all the accused-applicants have beaten the deceased by using Lathi and Dandas on account of which he died. Heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the record. Considering the facts and circumstances of the present case, the statements of the Doctor (PW-22) as well as Ashish Kumar (PW-13) and also considering the nature of injuries, recovery as well as DNA report (Ex.P-11 & P-96), in our considered view, no case is made out to allow the application for suspension of sentence. Hence, the application for suspension of sentence is dismissed.” 5. Learned Deputy Government Advocate assisted by counsel for the complainant vehemently opposed the application seeking suspension of sentence. 6. Upon careful consideration, this Court is of the view that the first application seeking suspension of sentence having been [2026:RJ-JP:20476-DB] (4 of 4) [SOSA-1948/2025] dismissed on merits qua applicants-accused Ajay Kumar @ Shoydan and Rajesh Kumar @ Poliya, and in the absence of any material change in circumstances, except for the additional duration of incarceration undergone by the applicants-accused, no justifiable ground has been made out warranting a different conclusion at this stage. 7. Consequently, in view of the earlier order passed by this Court on 12.09.2024, these applications for suspension of sentence filed on behalf of accused-applicants Ajay Kumar @ Shoydan and Rakesh Kumar @ Poliya stand dismissed. (BHUWAN GOYAL),J (INDERJEET SINGH),J Tushar/67-68