Durg Singh vs State Of Rajasthan on 11 July, 2025

Rajasthan High Court – Jodhpur

Durg Singh vs State Of Rajasthan on 11 July, 2025

Author: Farjand Ali

Bench: Farjand Ali

[2025:RJ-JD:30364]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
     S.B. Criminal Misc. Suspension of Sentence No.1295/2025
                                        in
               S.B. Criminal Appeal (Sb) No. 1754/2025

1.       Durg Singh S/o Shri Nathu Singh, Aged About 40 Years,
         Resident Of Sujasar, Police Station Ramdevra, District
         Jaisalmer, Rajasthan.
2.       Balveer Singh S/o Shri Bhanwar Singh, Aged About 41
         Years, Resident Of Jaglu, Police Station Panchu, District
         Bikaner, Rajasthan.
3.       Devi Singh S/o Shri Nathu Singh, Aged About 39 Years,
         Resident Of Sujasar, Police Station Ramdevra, District
         Aisalmer, Rajasthe
4.       Bhawani Singh S/o Chhatar Singh, Aged About 45 Years,
         Resident Of Denok, Police Station Matoda At Present
         Badoda Gaon, Jaisalmer, Rajasthan.
                                                                  ----Appellants
                                    Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through PP
                                                                 ----Respondent


For Appellant(s)          :     Mr. Vikram Singh
                                Mr. Subodh Jangid
For Respondent(s)         :     Mr. SS Rathore, PP



                HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI

Order

11/07/2025

1. The instant application for suspension of sentence has been

moved on behalf of the applicants in the matter of judgment dated

04.06.2025 passed by the learned Addl. District and Session

Judge Pokran, District Jaisalmer in Sessions Case No.63/2017

whereby he was convicted and sentenced to suffer maximum

imprisonment of two years under Sections 325/149 of IPC along

with a fine of Rs.2,000/- and lesser punishment for the other

offences under Sections 147, 148, 323/149 of IPC.

(Downloaded on 14/07/2025 at 09:40:05 PM)

[2025:RJ-JD:30364] (2 of 3)

2. It is contended by the learned counsel for the appellants that

the learned trial Judge has not appreciated the correct, legal and

factual aspects of the matter and thus, reached at an erroneous

conclusion of guilt, therefore, the same is required to be

appreciated again by this court being the first appellate Court.

Hearing of the appeal is likely to take long time, therefore, the

application for suspension of sentence may be granted.

3. Per contra, learned public prosecutor has vehemently

opposed the prayer made by learned counsel for the accused-

applicants for releasing the appellants on application for

suspension of sentence.

4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

material available on record.

5. Considering the submission that Section 325 of IPC does not

contain punishment of more than seven years and is a bailable

offence and triable by Magistrate, therefore, the provision of

Section 360 Cr.P.C. and 45 of Probation of Offenders Act would

apply mutatis mutandis because there is no previous conviction

against the appellant and thus, the point of extending the benefit

of probation to the appellants has not been considered

appropriately. Hearing of the appeal would likely to take a long

time, this court is of the opinion that it is a fit case for suspending

the sentence awarded to the accused-appellant.

6. Accordingly, the application for suspension of sentence filed

under Section 389 Cr.P.C. 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

(Downloaded on 14/07/2025 at 09:40:05 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:30364] (3 of 3)

of the aforesaid appeal and he 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 for their appearance in this court on 12.08.2025 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.

2. That if the applicants 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.

7. The learned trial Court shall keep the record of attendance of

the accused-applicants in a separate file. Such file be 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
99-chhavi/-

(Downloaded on 14/07/2025 at 09:40:05 PM)

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)