[2026:RJ-JP:25489-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Criminal Misc. Suspension Of Sentence Application No. 554/2025 In D.B. Criminal Appeal No.76/2025 URN: SOSA / 1024U / 2025 Premraj S/o Prahlad, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Choti Udayi Thana Piloda District Sawai Madhopur (At Present Accused Appellant Is Confined In District Jail Bharatpur) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Deepak Chauhan For Respondent(s) : Mr. Jitendra Singh Rathore, Addl.G.A. Mr. Siya Ram Sharma with Ms. Gayatri Sharma Mr. Dinesh Jat HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJEET SINGH HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BHUWAN GOYAL Order 08/07/2026 1. This suspension of sentence application has been filed by the accused-applicant along with the appeal. 2. Learned counsel for the accused-applicant submits that the accused-applicant has been convicted for the offences under Sections 302/34, 450/34 of IPC and Section 3/25 of the Arms Act. 3. Learned counsel for the accused-applicant has annexed the certificate under Rule 311 (3) of the Rajasthan High Court Rules to the effect that the accused-applicant was not on bail during trial and at present, he is confined in District Jail, Bharatpur. He further submits that the accused-applicant has been falsely implicated in this matter and the complainant has made a story of previous enmity against him. He further submits that according to [2026:RJ-JP:25489-DB] (2 of 2) [SOSA-554/2025] statement of DW-1, the alleged recovery of the country-made loaded pistol along with live cartridges is doubtful. He further submits that the hearing of appeal may take long time and prayed that sentence awarded to the accused-applicant may be suspended and he be released on bail during the pendency of the appeal. 4. Learned Additional Government Advocate assisted by learned counsel for the complainant has opposed the application for suspension of sentence and submitted that the accused-applicant caused the firearm injury on the person of deceased and during trial, eye witnesses consistently deposed that the accused- applicant had inflicted the firearm injury upon the deceased, which is corroborated from the FSL report. 5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 6. Considering the submissions put-forth by learned counsel for the parties and taking into account the facts and circumstances of the present case as well as looking to the seriousness of the offence(s) alleged against the accused-applicant and also considering the statement of eye witnesses as well as FSL report, in our considered view, no case is made out to allow the application for suspension of sentence. 7. Hence, the present application for suspension of sentence stands dismissed. (BHUWAN GOYAL),J (INDERJEET SINGH),J Upendra Pratap Singh/3