Sunday, 17, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Raja Ram vs State Of Rajasthan
2026 Latest Caselaw 6955 Raj

Citation : 2026 Latest Caselaw 6955 Raj
Judgement Date : 29 April, 2026

[Cites 5, Cited by 0]

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Raja Ram vs State Of Rajasthan on 29 April, 2026

Author: Farjand Ali
Bench: Farjand Ali
[2026:RJ-JD:20479]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
       S.B. Criminal Misc Suspension of Sentence Application

                                  No.785/2026

                                          IN

                S.B. Criminal Appeal (Sb) No. 824/2026
Raja Ram S/o Manphool, Aged About 68 Years, R/o Khinania Ps-
Talwara District Hanumangarh. (At Present Lodged In Central Jail
Sri Ganganagar)
                                                                           ----Appellant
                                       Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
                                                                         ----Respondent


For Appellant(s)             :     Mr. RS Gill
For Respondent(s)            :     Mr. Surendra Bishnoi, AGA



                HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI

Order

29/04/2026

1. The instant application for suspension of sentence has been

moved on behalf of the applicant in the matter of judgment

dated 21.04.2026 passed by the learned Special Judge,

NDPS Case, District Hanumangarh in Sessions Case

No.83/2019 whereby he was convicted and sentenced to

suffer maximum imprisonment of 2 years' RI along with a

fine of Rs.20,000/- under Section 8/15 of the NDPS ACT.

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

(Uploaded on 30/04/2026 at 01:32:42 PM)

[2026:RJ-JD:20479] (2 of 5) [SOSA-785/2026]

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

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

(Uploaded on 30/04/2026 at 01:32:42 PM)

[2026:RJ-JD:20479] (3 of 5) [SOSA-785/2026]

(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

of pending criminal appeals, and the likelihood of their early

disposal remains uncertain. In such circumstances,

continued incarceration, despite arguable grounds in appeal,

(Uploaded on 30/04/2026 at 01:32:42 PM)

[2026:RJ-JD:20479] (4 of 5) [SOSA-785/2026]

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.

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

(Uploaded on 30/04/2026 at 01:32:42 PM)

[2026:RJ-JD:20479] (5 of 5) [SOSA-785/2026]

registered as Criminal Misc. Case related to original case in

which the accused-applicant 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 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 198-Samvedana/-

(Uploaded on 30/04/2026 at 01:32:42 PM)

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter