[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Ganeshlal vs State Of Rajasthan (2026:Rj-Jd:15185) on 2 April, 2026

[2026:RJ-JD:15185]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
 S.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal)
                                  No. 87/2026

1.       Lehrulal S/o Miya Ram, Aged About 38 Years, Surtakhera,
         Police Station Akola, Chittorgarh (Presently Lodged At
         Central Jail Udaipur)
2.       Ram Lal S/o Bhagwan Lal, Aged About 38 Years,
         Surtakhera, Police Station Akola, Chittorgarh (Presently
         Lodged At Central Jail Udaipur)
                                                                       ----Petitioners
                                      Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
                                                                   ----Respondent
                                Connected With
 S.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal)
                                  No. 11/2026
1.       Tulsiram S/o Kering, Aged About 49 Years, R/o Surta
         Kheda,      Police     Station       Akola,        District     Chittorgarh.
         (Presently Lodged At Central Jail, Udaipur)
2.       Kishan Lal S/o Tulsi Ram, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Surta
         Kheda,      Police     Station       Akola,        District     Chittorgarh.
         (Presently Lodged At Central Jail, Udaipur)
3.       Kammu Alias Kamlesh S/o Mangi Lal, Aged About 29
         Years, R/o Jewana, Police Station Fatehnagar, Distance
         Udaipur. (Presently Lodged At Central Jail, Udaipur)
4.       Madhu S/o Ganesh Lal, Aged About 30 Years, R/o
         Sanwad, Police Station Fatehnagar Distance Udaipur.
         (Presently Lodged At Central Jail, Udaipur)
5.       Sonu Alias Sohan Lal S/o Suresh Chandra, Aged About 31
         Years, R/o Sanwad, Police Station Fatehnagar, Distance
         Udaipur.(Presently Lodged At Central Jail, Udaipur)
                                                                       ----Petitioners
                                      Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
                                                                   ----Respondent
 S.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal)
                                  No. 18/2026


                        (Uploaded on 02/04/2026 at 05:43:15 PM)
                       (Downloaded on 02/04/2026 at 08:53:54 PM)
 [2026:RJ-JD:15185]                   (2 of 6)                       [SOSA-87/2026]


Ganeshlal S/o Kishore, Aged About 56 Years, R/o Bhaniyakedi,
Police Station Akola, District Chittorgarh, Rajasthan. (At Present
Lodged In Central Jail Udaipur)
                                                                   ----Petitioner
                                    Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
                                                                 ----Respondent
 S.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal)
                                No. 88/2026
Sandeep Kumar S/o Nandlal, Aged About 33 Years, Resident Of
Tana, Thana Akola, District Chittorgarh. ( Presently Lodged In
Chittorgarh Jail)
                                                                   ----Petitioner
                                    Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through PP
                                                                 ----Respondent


For Petitioner(s)         :     Mr. Umesh Kant Vyas
                                Mr. Dhanraj Khinchi
                                Mr. Surendra Singh Shaktawat
For Respondent(s)         :     Mr. NS Chandawat, PP
                                Mr. OP Sangwa
                                Mr. Bheru Lal Jat



              HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP SHAH

Order

02/04/2026

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

except for omnibus allegations, there is no specific allegation

against any of the appellants-applicants. They further submit that

although as per the version of the prosecution, there were around

(Uploaded on 02/04/2026 at 05:43:15 PM)

[2026:RJ-JD:15185] (3 of 6) [SOSA-87/2026]

25 persons, conviction order has been passed against 9 persons

only. They further submit that 3 injured persons have been shown

in the case in hand out of which one injured Suresh has sustained

no injury and as far as injured Ganesh is concerned, in total he

has sustained 8 injuries, all from blunt weapon, out of which only

injury no.4, which was on a limb i.e. hand, was found to be

grievous. They further submit that as far as the injured Bherulal is

concerned, only injuries nos.3 and 4, which were on hand and

thigh respectively were found to be grievous and that too by blunt

weapon. They assert that though Bherulal has been shown to have

sustained 16 injuries, however, most of the injuries were by blunt

weapon and the alleged injuries by sharp weapon were found to

be simple in nature. They further submit that the site of the

incident is the petrol pump belonging to the friend of accused and

therefore, they cannot be treated as aggressors. They further

submit that when many persons cumulatively caused injuries,

then looking to the nature of injuries, the offence under Section

307 IPC is not made out. They further submit that the appellants-

applicants are behind the bars since 19.12.2025 and the incident

is of remote past i.e. of the year 2015. They further submit that

the appellants-applicants were on bail during the course of trial.

3. Per contra, the learned Public Prosecutor as well as the

learned counsel for the complainant oppose the application for

suspension of sentence and submit that looking to the nature of

the injuries sustained by Ganesh and Bherulal including grievous

injuries, it is clear that the intention of the assailants i.e. the

appellants-applicants was to cause death and therefore, the

necessary ingredients of Section 307 IPC are made out. They

(Uploaded on 02/04/2026 at 05:43:15 PM)

[2026:RJ-JD:15185] (4 of 6) [SOSA-87/2026]

further support the order impugned passed by the learned Trial

Court while asserting that considering all the aspects, the learned

trial Court has rightly convicted the appellants-applicants for

offence punishable under Section 307 IPC and imposed

imprisonment of 7 years and therefore, the accused-appellants are

not entitled to any indulgence whatsoever.

4. Upon consideration of the arguments advanced on behalf of

the parties and having regard to the facts and circumstances of

the case, I am of the opinion that the counsel for the appellants-

applicants have raised the arguable point with regard to the

absence of necessary ingredients of offence punishable under

Section 307 IPC. There is a substance in the argument of the

counsel for the appellants-applicants that more than 10 persons

had cause the injuries however, the nature of injuries clearly

specifies that none of the injury was found to be grievous, (which

was shown to have been caused by sharp weapon) and in spite of

being assaulted by so many persons the nature of injuries

sustained i.e. just one grievous injury by Ganesh and only two

grievous injuries by Sh. Bherulal itself fortifies the fact that there

was no intention to cause death and therefore the necessary

ingredients of Section 307 IPC are conspicuously missing. Further

there is substance in the argument of the learned counsel for the

appellants-applicants that the site of the incident was a petrol

pump belonging to the friend of appellants themselves, so they

cannot be called aggressors and also considering the facts that the

incident is of the remote past and the appellants-applicants were

on bail during the course of trial and the chances of hearing of

appeal in near future being bleak, this Court is of the opinion that

(Uploaded on 02/04/2026 at 05:43:15 PM)

[2026:RJ-JD:15185] (5 of 6) [SOSA-87/2026]

it is a fit case for suspending the sentence awarded to the

accused-appellant.

5. Accordingly, the application for suspension of sentence filed

under Section 389 of Cr.P.C./ Section 430 of BNSS, 2023 is

allowed and it is ordered that the sentence passed by the learned

Additional Sessions Judge Kapasan District Chittorgarh, vide

judgment dated 19.12.2025 in Sessions Case No. 15/2023

(13/2016) against the applicants Lehrulal S/o Miya Ram, Ram

Lal S/o Bhagwan Lal, Tulsiram S/o Kering, Kishan Lal S/o

Tulsi Ram, Kammu Alias Kamlesh S/o Mangi Lal, Madhu S/o

Ganesh Lal, Sonu Alias Sohan Lal S/o Suresh Chandra,

Ganeshlal S/o Kishore and Sandeep Kumar S/o Nandlal

shall remain suspended till final disposal of the aforesaid appeals

and they shall be released on bail, provided each of them 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 their appearance in this court on 05.05.2026 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.