[Cites 6, Cited by 0]
Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Bhagwan Das vs State Of Rajasthan on 28 April, 2026
Author: Farjand Ali
Bench: Farjand Ali
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Application For Suspension of Sentence
No.755/2026
in
S.B. Criminal Appeal (Sb) No. 797/2026
1. Bhagwan Das S/o Shri Harman Singh, Aged About 51
Years, R/o Owner Of Firm M/s Madan Medical Store
Padampur House No 34 A Block No 10 Satkartar
Gurudwara Ke Pass Padampur District Sri Ganganagar
Rajasthan.
2. Arvind Kumar Alais Arvindra Kumar S/o Shri Mangatram,
Aged About 46 Years, R/o Mangar Of Fir M/s Madan
Medical Store Padampur T/o Ward No 06 Indra Colony
Padampur District Sri Ganaganagar Rajasthan
3. Sushma S/o Shri Arvind Kumar Alais Arvindra Kumar,
Aged About 44 Years, R/o M/s Madan Medical Store
Padampur R/o Ward No 06 Indra Colony Padampur
District Sri Ganaganar Rajasthan
----Appellants
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Saurabh Soni
For Respondent(s) : Mr. SR Choudhary, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI
Order
28/04/2026
1. The instant application for suspension of sentence has been
moved on behalf of the applicant in the matter of judgment
dated 09.04.2026 passed by the learned Session Judge,
District Sri Ganganagar in Sessions Case No.54/2019
whereby they were convicted and sentenced to suffer
(Uploaded on 30/04/2026 at 10:39:48 AM)
(2 of 5) [SOSA-755/2026]
maximum imprisonment of 1 year's under Sections 27(B)
(II), 27(D), 22(3) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act and lesser
punishment for offence under Section 28 of the Drugs and
Cosmetics Act 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,
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
(Uploaded on 30/04/2026 at 10:39:48 AM)
(3 of 5) [SOSA-755/2026]
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
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.
(Uploaded on 30/04/2026 at 10:39:48 AM)
(4 of 5) [SOSA-755/2026]
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
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-applicants
named above shall remain suspended till final disposal of the
aforesaid appeal and they shall be released on bail provided
they 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 they will appear before the trial Court in
the month of January of every year till the
appeal is decided.
(Uploaded on 30/04/2026 at 10:39:48 AM)
(5 of 5) [SOSA-755/2026]
2. That if the applicant changes the place of
residence, they 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(s), they will give in writing their
changed address to the trial Court.
12. The learned trial Court shall keep the record of attendance of
the accused-applicant in a separate file. Such file be registered
as Criminal Misc. Case related to original case in which the
accused- applicants 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 does not appear before the trial
court, the learned trial Judge shall report the matter to the High
Court for cancellation of bail.
(FARJAND ALI),J
2-chhavi/-
(Uploaded on 30/04/2026 at 10:39:48 AM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
