Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Shrawan Kumar vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:42670) on 23 September, 2025

Author: Pushpendra Singh Bhati

Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati

[2025:RJ-JD:42670]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
 S.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal)
                               No. 560/2021

Shrawan Kumar S/o Kuldeep, Aged About 19 Years, R/o
Gulabpura, Presently At Ward No. 27, Rajgarh, Police Station
Rajgarh, District Churu (Presently Lodged In Central Jail,
Bikaner)
                                                                   ----Petitioner
                                    Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
                                                                 ----Respondent


For Petitioner(s)         :     Mr. Dhirendra Singh, Sr. Adv. assisted
                                by Mr. Jagdish Singh.
For Respondent(s)         :     Mr. Ramesh Dewasi, PP.



      HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI

                                  ORDER

23/09/2025

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. Brief facts of the case, as borne out from the record, are that

on 28.08.2017, the complainant, Motilal Sunar S/o Chetan Lal

Sunar, who is a goldsmith by profession, submitted a written

report at about 01:40 a.m. It was alleged therein that while he

was at his shop, about 7-8 persons came on motorcycles, some of

whom fired shots at the gate of the shop with revolvers and

pistols. When the complainant raised a hue and cry, he was also

fired upon, and thereafter, under threat of firearms, the accused

persons looted jewellery articles from his shop and fled away on

motorcycles. On the basis of the said report, investigation

commenced and the present appellant Shrawan Kumar came to be

tried and convicted.

(Uploaded on 24/09/2025 at 05:02:14 PM)

[2025:RJ-JD:42670] (2 of 6) [SOSA-560/2021]

3. Mr. Dhirendra Singh, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr.

Jagdish Singh, appearing on behalf of the applicant-appellant,

submits that the sentence of the applicant was initially suspended

by this Court vide order dated 21.09.2021 passed in the instant

application for suspension of sentence. The order dated

21.09.2021 reads as follows:

"In wake of second surge in the COVID-19 cases, abundant caution is being maintained, while hearing the matters in Court, for the safety of all concerned.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.

Learned counsel for the appellant has drawn the attention of this Court towards the paragraph 30 of the impugned order, in which, the learned trial court has observed that the looted articles were never recovered from the appellant Shrawan Kumar. Learned counsel also drawn the attention of this Court towards paragraph 31 of the impugned order, in which, the learned trial court has observed that the weapon in question was not recovered from the appellant.

Learned counsel submits that that the name of the appellant was not there in the FIR. Learned counsel further submits that though the identification was made, but the arrest memo contained the appellant's photograph.

Learned Public Prosecutor though opposes the suspension of sentence application, but has furnished the custody certificate, which reflects that the appellant has undergone custody of 04 years and 21 days.

This Court, on conjoint consideration of the custody period of 04 years and 21 days of the appellant and taking into consideration the fact that neither the looted articles nor any kind of weapon were recovered from the appellant, is inclined to suspend the substantive sentence awarded to the accused- appellant.

Accordingly, this S.B. Suspension of Sentence Application (Appeal) filed under Sec.389 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the substantive sentence passed by the trial court vide

(Uploaded on 24/09/2025 at 05:02:14 PM)

[2025:RJ-JD:42670] (3 of 6) [SOSA-560/2021]

judgment dated 06.07.2021 in Sessions Case No.04/2020 against appellant Shrawan Kumar S/o Kuldeep shall remain suspended till final disposal of the aforesaid appeal, 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 21.10.2021 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 appellant 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 address, they will give in writing their changed address to the trial Court.

The learned trial Court shall keep the record of attendance of the accused-appellant in a separate file. Such file be registered as Criminal Misc. Case related to original case in which the accused-appellant 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-appellant does not appear before the trial court, the learned trial Judge shall report the matter to the High Court for cancellation of bail."

4. It is brought to the notice of this Court that thereafter, the

complainant had approached the Hon'ble Apex Court by preferring

Criminal Appeal No.2661 of 2024 (Moti Lal Sunar v. State of

Rajasthan & Anr.), wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court vide

judgment dated 17.05.2024 had allowed the said appeal and while

setting aside the order dated 21.09.2021 passed by this Court,

cancelled the suspension of sentence primarily on account of two

subsequent FIRs having been registered against the appellant

subsequent to the suspension of his sentence. The judgment

(Uploaded on 24/09/2025 at 05:02:14 PM)

[2025:RJ-JD:42670] (4 of 6) [SOSA-560/2021]

dated 17.05.2024 delivered by the Hon'ble Apex Court is

reproduced verbatim hereunder:

"1. Leave granted.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the material placed on record.

3. Considering the fact that before the High Court the criminal antecedents of respondent no.2 had not been placed or rather not considered by the High Court while granting bail on the ground of period of incarceration undergone by the appellant, we are inclined to set aside the impugned order.

4. Further, subsequent conduct of respondent no.2 has also been highlighted by learned counsel for the respondent-State of Rajasthan by submitting that two more FIRs have been registered against respondent no.2 after his release on bail. We direct that all such facts be placed before the High Court while reconsidering the prayer for bail afresh.

5. Accordingly, we allow this appeal, set aside the impugned judgment dated 21.09.2021 and restore S.B. Criminal Misc. Suspension of Sentence Application (Appeal) No.560 of 2021 to its original file, to be considered afresh by the High Court. We also request the High Court to consider the same expeditiously.

6. We further direct respondent no.2 to surrender within four weeks from today, failing which the Trial Court will take appropriate measures for his custody.

7. Pending application(s) shall also stand disposed of."

5. Learned Senior Counsel has drawn the attention of this Court

to a material development in the matter, wherein both the FIRs

specifically referred to and relied upon by the Hon'ble Apex Court

in its judgment dated 17.05.2024 for cancellation of bail, have

subsequently been quashed by the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High

Court through separate orders. The details of such quashing

orders are as follows:

• First FIR: FIR No. 39 dated 07.03.2023, Police Station

Behal, District Bhiwani, has been quashed vide order dated

16.09.2025 passed by the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High

Court in "Vikram Singh & Others v. State of Haryana &

Others" (CRM-M No. 28974 of 2025).

(Uploaded on 24/09/2025 at 05:02:14 PM)

[2025:RJ-JD:42670] (5 of 6) [SOSA-560/2021]

• Second FIR: FIR No. 44 dated 11.03.2023, Police Station

Behal, District Bhiwani, has been quashed vide order dated

16.07.2025 passed by the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High

Court in "Vikram Singh & Others v. State of Haryana &

Others" (CRM-M No. 29012 of 2025).

6. Learned Public Prosecutor though opposes the suspension of

sentence application, but is unable to refute the aforesaid factual

matrix.

7. On conjoint consideration of the submissions advanced on

behalf of the appellant as well as the factual matrix of the case

particularly, in light of the quashing of both FIRs, which formed

the foundation for the Hon'ble Supreme Court's decision to cancel

the earlier suspension, this Court is inclined to suspend the

substantive sentence awarded to the accused-appellant.

8. Accordingly, this S.B. Suspension of Sentence Application

(Appeal) filed under Sec.389 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered

that the substantive sentence passed by learned Additional

Sessions Judge No.2, Rajgarh, District Churu vide judgment dated

06.07.2021 in Sessions Case No.4/2020 against appellant

Shrawan Kumar S/o Kuldeep shall remain suspended till final

disposal of the aforesaid appeal, 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 27.10.2025 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.

(Uploaded on 24/09/2025 at 05:02:14 PM)

[2025:RJ-JD:42670] (6 of 6) [SOSA-560/2021]

2. That if the appellant 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 address, they will give in writing their changed address to the trial Court.

9. The learned trial Court shall keep the record of attendance of

the accused-appellant in a separate file. Such file be registered as

Criminal Misc. Case related to original case in which the accused-

appellant 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-appellant does not appear before the trial court, the

learned trial Judge shall report the matter to the High Court for

cancellation of bail.

(DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI),J 29-Zeeshan