Mangilal vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:20309)
2025 Latest Caselaw 12302 Raj

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Mangilal vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:20309) on 25 April, 2025

Author: Farjand Ali

Bench: Farjand Ali

[2025:RJ-JD:20309]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
 S.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal)
                               No. 742/2025

Mangilal S/o Bheraram, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Gafur Bhatta,
Jaisalmer, District Jaisalmer. (Presently Lodged In Central Jail
Jaisalmer)
                                                                   ----Petitioner
                                    Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
                                                                 ----Respondent


For Petitioner(s)         :     Mr. Om Prakash
For Respondent(s)         :     Mr. Vikram Rajpurohit, DyGA



                HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI

Order

25/04/2025

1. The instant application for suspension of sentence has been

moved on behalf of the applicant in the matter of judgment dated

28.05.2024 passed by the learned Special Judge, Electricity Act

Cases, Jaisalmer in Sessions Case No.66/2016 whereby he was

convicted for the offence under Section 135 of the Electricity Act

and sentence to suffer imprisonment till rising of the court on that

day and to pay a fine of Rs.1,46,201/-. Since the appellant could

not pay the fine amount, he is languishing in jail since

07.04.2025.

2. It is contended on behalf of the applicant that the learned

trial Judge has not appreciated the correct, legal and factual

aspects of the matter and thus, reached at an erroneous

conclusion of guilt, therefore, the same is required to be

[2025:RJ-JD:20309] (2 of 3) [SOSA-742/2025]

appreciated again by this court being the first appellate Court.

Hearing of the appeal is likely to take long time, therefore, the

application for suspension of sentence may be granted. Learned

counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant is ready and

willing to deposit 50% of the fine amount with the trial court.

3. Per contra, learned public prosecutor has vehemently

opposed the prayer made on behalf of the accused-applicant for

releasing the appellant on application for suspension of sentence.

4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

material available on record.

5. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the

parties and looking to the totality of facts and circumstances of

the case and willingness of the appellant to deposit 50% of the

fine amount, it is deemed appropriate to allow the instant

application seeking suspension of sentence.

6. Accordingly, the application for suspension of sentence filed

under Section 389 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the

sentence passed by the learned trial court against the appellant,

details of which are provided in opening para of this order, shall

remain suspended till final disposal of the aforesaid appeal and he

shall be released on bail provided he furnishes an undertaking that

he will deposit 50% of the fine amount with the trial court from

the date of his actual release and 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

[2025:RJ-JD:20309] (3 of 3) [SOSA-742/2025]

court on 26.05.2025 and whenever ordered to do so till the

disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated below:-

1. That he will appear before the trial Court in the month of January of every year till the appeal is decided.

2. 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.

3. Similarly, if the sureties change their addresses, they will give in writing their changed address to the trial Court.

(FARJAND ALI),J 101-Pramod/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)