Hari Rao Maratha vs State Of Rajasthan
2026 Latest Caselaw 5504 Raj

Citation : 2026 Latest Caselaw 5504 Raj
Judgement Date : 9 April, 2026

[Cites 4, Cited by 0]

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Hari Rao Maratha vs State Of Rajasthan on 9 April, 2026

Author: Farjand Ali

Bench: Farjand Ali

        HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                         JODHPUR
     S.B. Criminal Suspension of Sentence Application No.639/2026

                                          in

                  S.B. Criminal Appeal (Sb) No. 671/2026

Hari Rao Maratha S/o Yashwant Rao Maratha, Aged About 63
Years, Madola, Tehsil Nimbaheda, District Chittorgarh. Presently
R/o Inside Delhi Gate, Chittorgarh. Teacher Posted As Junior
Engineer, Karyalana Khand Sandarbh Kendra Prabhari, Sarva
Shiksha Abhiyan, Kapasan, District Chittorgarh.
                                                                       ----Appellant
                                      Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
                                                                     ----Respondent


For Appellant(s)              :    Mr. Nishant Bora
For Respondent(s)             :    Mr. Surendra Bishnoi, PP



                  HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI

Order

09/04/2026

1. The instant application for suspension of sentence has been

moved on behalf of the applicant in the matter of judgment

dated 30.03.2026 passed by the learned Special Judge

(Prevention of Corruption Act) No.2, District Udaipur in

Special Sessions Case No.275/2019 whereby he was

convicted and sentenced to suffer maximum imprisonment

of 1 year under Sections 7 and 13(1)(D) r/w 13(2) of

Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 along with fine and

default sentence.

2. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the trial court

failed to properly appreciate the legal and factual aspects,

(Uploaded on 10/04/2026 at 04:28:52 PM)

(2 of 5) [SOSA-639/2026]

resulting in an erroneous finding of guilt. Being the first

appellate court, this Court may reappraise the evidence. It is

further submitted that the appellant remained on bail during

trial without misuse of liberty, and as the appeal will take

time for disposal, the sentence deserves to be suspended.

3. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the prayer for

suspension of sentence.

4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

material available on record.

5. The distinction between grant of bail under Section 439 CrPC

(corresponding to Section 483 BNSS)and suspension of

sentence under Section 389 CrPC ( corresponding to Section

430 BNSS)is well settled. While the former operates at the

pre-conviction stage, the latter comes into play post-

conviction and requires the appellate court to assess, prima

facie, the sustainability of the conviction and sentence under

challenge.

6. Upon conviction, the presumption of innocence stands

displaced; however, while considering suspension of

sentence, the appellate court is required to evaluate whether

the grounds raised in appeal disclose a substantial and

arguable case. If the material on record suggests that the

findings of the trial court may be debatable, the discretion

under Section 389 CrPC (corresponding to Section 430

BNSS) can be justifiably invoked. Where the appeal raises

issues which, on prima facie consideration, indicate a

reasonable possibility of success, including reversal or

(Uploaded on 10/04/2026 at 04:28:52 PM)

(3 of 5) [SOSA-639/2026]

modification of conviction, the sentence may be suspended

pending adjudication.

7. This Court is guided by the enunciation of law by the Hon'ble

Supreme Court in Muna Bisoi v. State of Odisha

(February 16, 2026), wherein it has been held that

prolonged pendency of criminal appeals, not attributable to

the convict, constitutes a valid ground for suspension of

sentence. Reliance has also been placed on Kashmira

Singh v. State of Punjab (1977) 4 SCC 291 , wherein the

Supreme Court deprecated continued incarceration of

convicts for long periods during pendency of appeals,

observing that such practice would amount to a travesty of

justice.

8. It is equally settled that while considering such application,

the appellate court is not required to record conclusive

findings on merits, as that would prejudice the final

adjudication. A prima facie satisfaction regarding the

arguability and substance of the grounds would suffice. The

appellate jurisdiction being a continuation of trial, the entire

evidence remains open to re-appreciation. The court may

ultimately affirm, modify, or set aside the conviction, or alter

the sentence, depending upon the outcome of such re-

evaluation.

9. Additionally, even where conviction is sustained, the nature

of offence or quantum of sentence may warrant

reconsideration at the appellate stage, which further justifies

a liberal approach in appropriate cases. This Court cannot

lose sight of the fact that it is burdened with a large number

(Uploaded on 10/04/2026 at 04:28:52 PM)

(4 of 5) [SOSA-639/2026]

of pending criminal appeals, and the likelihood of their early

disposal remains uncertain. In such circumstances,

continued incarceration, despite arguable grounds in appeal,

would not be justified, particularly when delay is not

attributable to the appellant.

10. In the present case, the issues raised are significant and

merit consideration. If accepted, they may result in acquittal.

They require proper examination and re-appreciation of

evidence, with a fair possibility of benefit to the appellant.

11. Accordingly, the application for suspension of sentence filed

under Section 389 Cr.P.C. (corresponding to Section 430

BNSS) is allowed and it is ordered that the sentence passed

by learned trial court, the details of which are provided in

the first para of this order, against the appellant-applicant

named above 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 the

learned trial Judge 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 applicant 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.