Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Ratan Lal vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:42641) on 23 September, 2025
[2025:RJ-JD:42641]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal)
No. 1222/2025
1. Ratan Lal S/o Shri Mangilal Bhambi, Aged About 27 Years,
R/o Harrajpura, P.S. Masuda, District Ajmer, Rajasthan
(Presently Lodged In At Jail, Udaipur)
2. Raju S/o Shri Prabhulal Rawat, Aged About 22 Years, R/o
Bassi, P.s. Masuda, District Ajmer, Rajasthan
(Presently Lodged In At Jail, Udaipur)
3. Hanuman S/o Shri Ramlal Rayaka, Aged About 23 Years,
R/o Kelu, P.s. Masuda, District Ajmer, Rajasthan
(Presently Lodged In At Jail, Udaipur)
4. Kalu @ Ghasi Rawat S/o Shri Hemraj @ Hema, Aged
About 26 Years, R/o Jaisinghpura PS Vijaynagar District
Ajmer, Rajasthan
(Presently Lodged In At Jail, Udaipur)
----Petitioners
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through PP
----Respondent
Connected With
S.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal)
No. 1223/2025
Lalit Kumar S/o Gautam Lal Aged About 25 Years, R/o Itally
Kheda PS Salumber District Udaipur At Present 2E Sengwa
Housing Board PS Sadar District Chittorgarh
(Lodged In Central Jail, Udaipur)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through PP
----Respondent
Connected With
S.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal)
No. 1259/2025
Karan Singh S/o Ram Chandra Chandel, Aged About 21 Years,
R/o Kundkheda, Police Station Narayangarh, District Mandsaur,
Madhyapradesh, At Present House No 161, Sector No. 5,
Gandhinagar, Natha, Kotwali, District Chittorgarh. (At Present
Lodged In District Jail Chittorgarh)
----Petitioner
Versus
(Uploaded on 23/09/2025 at 07:10:44 PM)
(Downloaded on 24/09/2025 at 10:20:28 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:42641] (2 of 4) [SOSA-1222/2025]
State Of Rajasthan, Through PP
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Zafar Khan
Mr. Surendra Singh Shaktawat
Mr. Kaushal Gautam
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sameer Pareek, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP SHAH
Order
23/09/2025
IN S.B. Criminal Appeal No.1709/2025:-
Admit.
IN S.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application
(Appeal) No. 1222/2025, 1223/2025 & 1259/2025 :-
1. Heard learned counsel for the appellants-applicants as well
as learned Public Prosecutor and perused the material available on
record.
2. Learned counsel for the appellants-applicants submit that the
FIR has been lodged by the complainant after a delay of 4 days,
inasmuch as, the alleged incident has occurred on 16.10.2012 and
the FIR in question has been lodged on 20.10.2012 and no
reasons for delay have been specified. They further submit that
statement of complainant- Mahaveer Singh(PW-10) will reveal that
the identification itself was not worth relying upon for the reason
that the complainant was informed by the police itself as to who
were the accused before the test identification. They further
submit that no recovery has been effected from the present
appellants and the appellants were on bail during the course of
trial. They further submit that the hearing of the appeals will take
(Uploaded on 23/09/2025 at 07:10:44 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:42641] (3 of 4) [SOSA-1222/2025]
time and implore this Court to allow suspension of sentence
applications.
3. Per Contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposes the
applications for suspension of sentence and submits that the
accused-persons were identified by the complainant - Mahaveer
Singh (PW-10) and, therefore, the learned trial Court after
considering the entire evidence has rightly convicted the
appellants.
4. Upon consideration of the arguments advanced on behalf of
both sides and after having perused the record of the case,
including the facts that no recovery has been effected from the
present appellants, there are arguable points with regard to the
test identification as the complainant himself stated that the police
officials themselves had identified the accused and shown them to
him prior to test identification, the accused were on bail during the
course of trial and the chances of hearing of the appeals in near
future being bleak, this Court deems it appropriate to suspend the
sentence awarded to the accused-appellants.
5. Accordingly, the applications for suspension of sentence filed
under Section 430 BNSS (Old Provision Section 389 of Cr.P.C.) are
allowed and it is ordered that the sentence passed by the learned
Additional District And Session Judge No.2, Nimbhera, District
Chittorgarh, vide judgment dated 25.06.2025 in Sessions Case
No.21/2015 (16/2013), against the appellants-applicants Ratan
Lal S/o Shri Mangilal Bhambi, Raju S/o Shri Prabhulal
Rawat, Hanuman S/o Shri Ramlal Rayaka, Kalu @ Ghasi
Rawat S/o Shri Hemraj @ Hema, Lalit Kumar S/o Gautam
Lal & Karan Singh S/o Ram Chandra Chandel shall remain
(Uploaded on 23/09/2025 at 07:10:44 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:42641] (4 of 4) [SOSA-1222/2025]
suspended till final disposal of the aforesaid appeals and they shall
be released on bail, provided each of them execute a personal
bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties of Rs.50,000/-
each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for their
appearance in this court on 27.10.2025 and whenever ordered to
do so till the disposal of the appeals 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 accused-applicant(s) in a separate file. Such file be registered
as Criminal Misc. Case related to original case in which the
accused-applicant(s) was/were 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(s) does/do 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
129-131-charul/-
(Uploaded on 23/09/2025 at 07:10:44 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
