Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Bheru Singh vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:41060) on 15 September, 2025
[2025:RJ-JD:41060]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal)
No. 1605/2025
Bheru Singh S/o Jabar Singh @ Jabraram, Aged About 27 Years,
R/o Kanana, Police Station, Samdari, District Balotra. (Presently
Lodged At District Jail, Balotra)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through PP
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Nishant Bora
Mr. Meetaksh Dadhich
Mr. Prithvi Singh
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sameer Pareek, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP SHAH
Order
15/09/2025
1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant-applicant as well as
learned Public Prosecutor and perused the material available on
record.
2. Learned counsel for the appellant-applicant submits that the
co-accused, namely Jabar Singh @ Jabraram and Smt. Gita Devi,
who are the father-in-law and mother-in-law of the deceased,
have already been enlarged on bail by this Court, by way of
allowing the suspension of sentence application in S.B. Criminal
Misc. Suspension of Sentence Application No.1170/2025, by way
of order dated 30.07.2025. He submits that the case of the
appellant-applicant is not distinguishable from that of the
aforesaid co-accused persons, except for the fact that he is the
husband, whereas Jabar Singh @ Jabraram and Smt. Gita Devi are
(Uploaded on 15/09/2025 at 08:04:48 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:41060] (2 of 5) [SOSA-1605/2025]
the father-in-law and mother-in-law of the deceased. He further
submits that there is no evidence of any demand of dowry soon
before the death of the deceased. He asserts that PW-1 the
complainant uncle of the deceased, himself admitted that he last
met or had any talk with the deceased almost one month prior to
the incident. He further submits that as per the complainant
himself, the appellant-applicant used to stay at Surat only. He
further submits that there are omnibus allegations against all
three accused persons and there is no specific allegation with
regard to demand of dowry. He asserts that independent
witnesses, namely PW-3 Ranchhor Singh, PW-7 Kheemaram @
Ramesh and PW-8 Durgaram, have specifically stated that there
was no issue with regard to any demand of dowry by the
appellant-applicant or his family members, and they have further
fortified the fact that the appellant-applicant was not even present
at the site when the incident occurred. He further points out that
PW-8 Durgaram has even gone to the extent of stating that the
deceased herself informed him that she was engulfed in fire on
account of her own fault and there was no fault on the part of her
husband, father-in-law or mother-in-law. He also submits that
none of the above-mentioned witnesses have been declared
hostile by the prosecution. He further submits that the appellant-
applicant was on bail during the course of trial and is now behind
the bars for almost a period of 1 year and 11 months, whereas the
similarly situated co-accused have already been enlarged on bail.
3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposes the application
for suspension of sentence and submits that the present
appellant-applicant is the husband and, therefore, the case of
(Uploaded on 15/09/2025 at 08:04:48 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:41060] (3 of 5) [SOSA-1605/2025]
Jabar Singh @ Jabraram and Smt. Gita Devi is easily
distinguishable with that of the appellant-applicant. He submits
that there is specific demand of dowry being made before the
death, which is fortified by the statement of PW.1 complainant
uncle- Sankar Singh. He further submits that the evidence of
PW.4-Pyari Devi (i.e. the mother of the deceased) as well as the
evidence of PW.9-Trilok Singh (i.e. the father of the deceased) is
very specific and fortified the fact of demand of dowry. He also
asserts that within one year of marriage, the deceased was
burned to death, and therefore, the learned Trial Court has rightly
convicted the appellant-applicant. He, therefore, prays for
rejection of the application for suspension of sentence.
4. Upon consideration of the arguments advanced on behalf of
both the parties and having perused the record of the case, this
Court is of the opinion that since omnibus allegation have been
levelled against all the three accused, the case of the appellant-
applicant cannot be distinguished with the case of Jabar Singh @
Jabraram and Smt. Gita Devi, who have already been extended
the benefit of the suspension of sentence application by this Court
by way of order dated 30.07.2025, while considering the fact that
there is no demand of dowry soon before the death. This coupled
with the fact that the independent witnesses, who have not been
declared hostile, have specifically averred that there was no
dispute between the deceased and the appellant-applicant and
have further stated that the accused was not even present at the
site when the incident took place, as also, considering the
statement of PW.9-Trilok Singh, wherein he has admitted that the
deceased never informed him with regard to any demand of dowry
(Uploaded on 15/09/2025 at 08:04:48 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:41060] (4 of 5) [SOSA-1605/2025]
on the part of her in-laws or the appellant-applicant, and the fact
that the appellant-applicant was on bail during the course of trial
and there are bleak chances of the criminal appeal being heard in
near future, without commenting upon the merits of the case, this
Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case for suspending the
sentence awarded to the appellant-applicant.
5. Accordingly, the application for suspension of sentence filed
under Section 430 of BNSS is allowed and it is ordered that the
sentence passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Balotra, vide
judgment dated 12.06.2025 in Sessions Case No.11/2018 (CIS
No.16/2018) against the appellant-applicant; Bheru Singh S/o
Jabar Singh @ Jabraram, 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.2,00,000/-
with two sureties of Rs.1,00,000/- each to the satisfaction of the
learned trial Judge for his appearance in this court on 16.10.2025
and whenever ordered to do so till the disposal of the appeal on
the conditions indicated below:-
1. That he/she/they will appear before the trial
Court in the month of January of every year till the
appeal is decided.
2. That if the applicant(s) changes the place of
residence, he/she/they will give in writing
his/her/their changed address to the trial Court as
well as to the counsel in the High Court.
3. Similarly, if the sureties change their address(s),
they will give in writing their changed address to
the trial Court.
6. The learned trial Court shall keep the record of attendance of
the appellant-applicant in a separate file. Such file be registered
as Criminal Misc. Case related to original case in which the
(Uploaded on 15/09/2025 at 08:04:48 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:41060] (5 of 5) [SOSA-1605/2025]
appellant-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 appellant-applicant does not appear before the trial court, the
learned trial Judge shall report the matter to the High Court for
cancellation of bail.
(SANDEEP SHAH),J
162-devrajP/-
(Uploaded on 15/09/2025 at 08:04:48 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
