Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Saleem @ Kana vs State Of Rajasthan on 7 October, 2025
Author: Dinesh Mehta
Bench: Dinesh Mehta
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
D.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal)
No. 1518/2025
In
D.B. Criminal Appeal No.150/2025
Saleem @ Kana S/o Shri Badaudeen, Aged About 34 Years, R/o
Kurada, P.s. Peelwa, Dist. Nagaur. (Lodged In Central Jail, Ajmer)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Jagmal Singh Choudhary, Sr.
Advocate assisted by Mr. Pradeep
Choudhary
Ms. Sampatti Choudhary
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Pradeep Choudhary, AAG
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SANGEETA SHARMA
Order
07/10/2025
1. The present application has been filed by the applicant under
section 389 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter
referred to as 'Cr.P.C.') [430(2) of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha
Sanhita, 2023] seeking suspension of the following sentence
awarded to him by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention
of Atrocities) Cases, Merta (hereinafter referred to as 'trial Court')
vide judgment dated 09.04.2025 passed in Sessions Case
No.180/2017 (208/2017) (State vs. Saleem@Kana):-
S.No Offence Sentence Fine
1. 302 IPC Life Imprisonment To pay a fine of Rs.50,000/-; in
default thereof to further
undergo one year simple
sentence
(Uploaded on 07/10/2025 at 06:24:29 PM)
(2 of 5) [SOSA-1518/2025]
2. Mr. Choudhary, learned Senior Counsel submitted that the
injuries caused to the deceased were on account of sudden
provocation, which is evident from the record and also from the
statements of PW-5 (Ramesh Meghwal) and PW-6 (Khema Ram).
He submitted that though, as per the prosecution, Lathi was used
for hitting the deceased but there is hardly any sign of lathi blow,
as neither any lacerated wound nor blood stain has been found.
3. Learned Senior Counsel submitted that the facts on record
clearly suggest that during the mutual scuffle the deceased
suffered injuries with fist and maybe leg blows, which cannot be
said to be with any intention to murder the deceased, more
particularly, when none of the injuries was on vital part of the
body.
4. He further argued that the incident took place on 15.09.2017
at 4 p.m. and FIR came to be lodged on 19.09.2017, which itself
suggests that there was no serious injury suffered by the
deceased.
5. Inviting Court's attention towards the Post Mortem Report,
learned Senior Counsel submitted that cause of death is
indisputably, septicemia, due to injuries in the intestine.
6. Learned Additional Advocate General vehemently opposed
the application for suspension of sentence by pointing out the
number of injuries, which the deceased suffered - he argued that
the fact that 7-8 injuries were inflicted upon the deceased is
(Uploaded on 07/10/2025 at 06:24:29 PM)
(3 of 5) [SOSA-1518/2025]
indicative of applicant's intention to cause multiple injuries so as
to ensure that he succumbed to them.
7. Heard learned Senior Counsel and learned Additional
Advocate General and perused the material available on record.
8. On perusal of the Post Mortem Report, it is clear that the
deceased died due to septicemia emanating from bleeding and
generation of pus in the ruptured intestine.
9. True it is, that Lathi has been recovered from the applicant
but the fact that there is no sign of Lathi blow on any part much
less vital parts of the body so also the fact that the deceased was
not taken to hospital immediately after being assaulted and he
was taken to the hospital after two days is suggestive that no
apparent grievous injuries were caused to him.
10. Maybe, because of blows of Lathi or fist or foot over the
stomach, intestine of the deceased got ruptured which caused
septicemia; but in the given facts, the stand of Mr. Choudhary
appears plausible. It is very difficult to conclude intention and
preparation to commit homicide on a primary examination of
evidence on record.
11. In view of the aforesaid and considering that the applicant
has already suffered incarceration for more than 8 years, we are
inclined to accept the application for suspension of sentence of the
applicant.
12. Accordingly, the application for suspension of sentence filed
by the applicant is hereby allowed. It is ordered that the sentence
(Uploaded on 07/10/2025 at 06:24:29 PM)
(4 of 5) [SOSA-1518/2025]
passed by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of
Atrocities) Cases, Merta vide judgment dated 09.04.2025 in
Sessions Case No.180/2017 against the applicant - Saleem @
Kana S/o Shri Badaudeen shall remain suspended till final
disposal of the aforesaid appeal and he shall be released on bail,
provided he 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 07.11.2025
and whenever ordered to do so till the disposal of the appeal on
the conditions indicated below:-
(i) That he will appear before the trial Court in the month of
January of every year till the appeal is decided.
(ii) That if the applicant change 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.
(iii) Similarly, if the sureties change their address, they will
give in writing their changed address to the trial Court.
13. The learned trial Court shall keep the record of attendance of
the accused-applicant in a separate file. Such file be registered as
Criminal Misc. Case related to original case in which the accused-
applicant was tried and convicted. A copy of this order shall also
be placed in that file for ready reference. Criminal Misc. file shall
not be taken into account for statistical purpose relating to
pendency and disposal of cases in the trial court. In case the said
accused applicant does not appear before the trial court, the
learned trial Judge shall report the matter to the High Court for
cancellation of bail.
(Uploaded on 07/10/2025 at 06:24:29 PM)
(5 of 5) [SOSA-1518/2025]
14. Needless to state that the observations made hereinabove in
relation to guilt or otherwise of the applicant are prima-facie
opinion considering the material to the extent necessary for the
purpose of consideration of instant application. None of the parties
shall rely upon the findings or observations made herein at the
time of arguing final hearing of the appeal.
(SANGEETA SHARMA),J (DINESH MEHTA),J
24-raksha/-
(Uploaded on 07/10/2025 at 06:24:29 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
