Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Gaffur Khan vs State Of Rajasthan ... on 4 September, 2025

Bench: Dinesh Mehta, Vinod Kumar Bharwani

[2025:RJ-JD:39430-DB]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
     D.B. Criminal Misc 2nd Suspension Of Sentence Application
                           (Appeal) No. 320/2024
                                           In
                  D.B. Criminal Appeal No.110/2021

Gaffur Khan S/o Rimmu Khan, Aged About 36 Years, R/o
Jawaharpura, Tehsil Pachpadra, District Barmer. (Confined In
Central Jail, Jodhpur)
                                                                      ----Petitioner
                                       Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
                                                                    ----Respondent


For Petitioner(s)            :     Mr. B Ray Bishnoi
For Respondent(s)            :     Mr. CS Ojha, PP


             HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI (Through VC) Order

04/09/2025

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 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha

Sanhita, 2023) seeking suspension of the following sentences

awarded to him by the learned Sessions Judge, Balotra, District

Barmer (hereinafter referred to as 'trial Court') vide judgment

dated 19.08.2021 passed in Session Case No.43/2015:-

S.No Offence             Sentence                                   Fine
1.     302 IPC      Life Imprisonment To pay a fine of Rs.10,000/-; in
                                      default thereof to further
                                      undergo one year's additional
                                      simple imprisonment
2.     201 IPC    Three Years' Simple To pay a fine of Rs.3,000/-; in
                    Imprisonment      default thereof to further
                                      undergo six months' additional

                         (Uploaded on 09/09/2025 at 10:23:23 AM)

 [2025:RJ-JD:39430-DB]                   (2 of 5)                         [SOSA-320/2024]


                                                   simple imprisonment

2. The applicant's first application for suspension of sentence

(D.B. Criminal Misc. Suspension of Sentence Application (Appeal)

No.706/2021) was dismissed by the co-ordinate Bench of this

Court vide order dated 05.03.2022.

3. Mr. Bishnoi, learned counsel for the appellant-applicant

submits that the appellant-applicant has preferred the present

application on the solitary ground that he has already undergone

sentence of more than 10 years and there is no likelihood of

appeal being taken up for hearing in near future. Relying upon the

directions of Hon'ble The Supreme Court dated 15.09.2022 in

Sonadhar v. The State of Chhattisgarh : SLP (Crl.)

No.529/2021, learned counsel prayed that the sentence of the

applicant be suspended and he be enlarged on bail.

4. Learned counsel argued that no reasons and/or aggravating

circumstances exist for denial of bail to the applicant while placing

reliance on the order dated 05.10.2021 of Hon'ble The Supreme

Court in Saudan Singh v. The State of Uttar Pradesh : SLP

(Crl.) No.4633/2021. He read the relevant part/observations

made therein and submitted that the High Court should grant bail

if the accused has served more than 10 years' sentence, except

certain circumstances, and that none of the exceptions are

applicable in the present case.

5. Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application for

suspension of sentence by contending that the appellant-applicant

has committed heinous offence and suspension of sentence of

such an offender would send adverse message in the society.

(Uploaded on 09/09/2025 at 10:23:23 AM)

[2025:RJ-JD:39430-DB] (3 of 5) [SOSA-320/2024]

However, he has not denied the fact that the appellant-applicant

has already undergone sentence of more than 10 years during

trial and upon conviction.

6. We have considered the submissions made by learned

counsel for the parties and have perused the material available on

record.

7. It is to be noted that long list of criminal appeals even filed

in the year 2008 are pending hearing; there is no possibility that

the present appeal can be taken up for hearing in near future.

8. Hon'ble The Supreme Court in the case of Sonadhar (supra),

while dealing with SMW (Crl.) No.4/2021 pertaining to 'life

convicts in jail whose appeals are pending before the High Court'

inter-alia, issued the following directions:-

"We consider appropriate to issue directions in terms of the aforesaid suggestions to the Patna High Court and on a pari materia basis to even the other High Courts. However, in order to carry out this exercise, the data would have to be compiled of such of the persons who have been in custody for more than 10 years and more than 14 years, with these persons being considered for grant of bail pending appeal, if there is no chance of hearing of the appeal in the near future, unless there are reasons for denial of bail. We can understand if any of the parties is delaying the appeal itself but short of that, we are of the view that all persons who have completed 10 years of sentence and appeal is not in proximity of hearing with no extenuating circumstances should be enlarged on bail."

9. Prior to that in the case of Saudan Singh (supra) also

observations were made regarding grant of bail in cases where

convicts have undergone sentence for sufficiently long time and

(Uploaded on 09/09/2025 at 10:23:23 AM)

[2025:RJ-JD:39430-DB] (4 of 5) [SOSA-320/2024]

appeals were pending at the High Court stage with exceptions

indicated therein.

10. In the present case as observed herein-before, the

appellant-applicant have already undergone sentence of more

than 10 years and apparently, there are no chances of the appeal

being heard in the near future. Except for the fact that the

appellant-applicant was involved in offences leading to his

conviction for life, nothing has been brought on record by way of

aggravating circumstances for denial of suspension of sentence.

11. Consequently, following the order in the case of Sonadhar

(supra) and observations made in Saudan Singh (supra), without

making any observations on merits of the case, we are inclined to

suspend the sentence of the appellant-applicant- Gaffur Khan

S/o Rimmu Khan during the pendency of the appeal.

12. Accordingly, the instant second 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 Sessions Judge

Balotra, District Barmer vide judgment dated 19.08.2021 passed

in Sessions Case No.43/2015 (State of Rajasthan vs. Gaffur Khan)

against the appellant-applicant- Gaffur Khan S/o Rimmu Khan,

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 learned trial Judge for his appearance in

this court on 06.10.2025 and whenever ordered to do so till the

disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated below:

(Uploaded on 09/09/2025 at 10:23:23 AM)

[2025:RJ-JD:39430-DB] (5 of 5) [SOSA-320/2024]

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 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.