State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p v. For

: Mr. Jagdish Nagar For Respondent(s) : Mr. Devi Singh, PP with Mr. Gaurav Gupta, AAAG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN 12/05/2025 Order

1. The instant application for suspension of sentence is preferred by appellants- Om Prakash S/o Ramlal, Dhanraj S/o [2025:RJ-JP:19968] (2 of 5) [SOSA-476/2025] Ramlal, Girdhari S/o Ramlal and Bhawanishankar S/o Ramlal in pending appeal which was admitted on 04.04.2025 and filed aggrieved from order of conviction and sentence dated

11.02.2025 in Sessions Case No. 308/2017 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST (POA) Act, Baran whereby appellant was convicted for offence under Sections 307/34, 326/34, 325/34, 324/34, 323/34 and 341 IPC and sentenced accordingly.

2. Learned counsel for the appellant while relying upon grounds of appeal submitted that the instant case is registered by complainant so as to settled dispute relating to Bada between the parties. He further referred the evidence of prosecution and submitted that both the parties were related to each other and there is pending land dispute between them. He further referred statement of PW-1 Prahlad, PW-2 Babulal, PW-3 Chameli, PW-4 Rekha and submitted that no specific attribution was made upon any of accused for deadly assault. He also referred the statement of PW-12 Dr. Jagdish Yadav and submitted that none of the injury was found on vital part of the body. He further referred the recovery of stick and sword and submitted that these were not produced before the trial court. He further referred the FSL report and submitted that no stains were found during FSL examination. He further submitted that the witnesses have suggested that two persons were armed with sharp edged sword but police has registered only one sword from Dhanraj. He also submitted that none of the injury was dangerous to life and the trial court without considering the opinion and gravity of injury has convicted the accused under Section 307 IPC. At last, he submitted that these [2025:RJ-JP:19968] (3 of 5) [SOSA-476/2025] appellants were on bail during trial and they never misued the liberty granted to them.

3. Aforesaid contentions were opposed by learned Public Prosecutor. He submitted custody certificate of all the accused and same are taken on record.

4. Heard learned counsel for appellant and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the record.

5. On the basis of Parcha Bayan of PW-1 Prahlad Ex. P/1 FIR no. 34/2016 was registered at P.S. Kishanganj District Baran on

15.02.2016. After investigation police has filed charge-sheet against four persons. After framing the charge, the prosecution has examined 18 witnesses and exhibited 26 documents. The accused were examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and they have not submitted any defence evidence. Three documents were exhibited by them. The trial court has convicted present appellant accused under Section 307/34, 326/34, 325/34, 325/34, 323/34 and 341 IPC. The maximum sentence awarded is seven years.

6. The record reflect that all the appellants accused were on bail during trial and they were taken in custody at the time of conviction. There is no other criminal antecedents against Girdhari, Dhanraj, Om Prakash but two criminal cases were registered against Bhawani Shankar and both were disposed of. We have considered the statement of PW-1 Prahlad Sharma who is complainant and also injured. Another injured PW-2 Babulal was examined by prosecution along with PW-3 Chameli Bai and PW-4 Rekha and all belongs to one family and their cross-examination indicate that there is a land dispute between the parties. The medical report of injured was prepared by PW-12 Dr. Jagdish [2025:RJ-JP:19968] (4 of 5) [SOSA-476/2025] Yadav after medical examination and we have considered his cross-examination along with his opinion. The investigating Officer was examined as PW-17. The disposal of appeal will takes its own time.

7. Therefore, without expressing any opinion on merits, but having considered the totality and facts and circumstances of the case, I am of considered view that it is a fit case wherein appellant can be enlarged on bail. The application under Section 430(1) B.N.S.S. is allowed and sentence of appellants accused- Om Prakash S/o Ramlal, Dhanraj S/o Ramlal, Girdhari S/o Ramlal and Bhawanishankar S/o Ramlal, is suspended till disposal of appeal with the condition that each of them would execute 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 his appearance in this court on 22.08.2025 and whenever ordered to do so till the disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated below:-

1. After release of appellant on bail, they will not indulge in any criminal activity and if it is found that he is involved in any criminal activity, the order shall be recalled.

2. That they will appear before the trial Court in the month of January of every year till the appeal is decided.

3. That if the applicant(s) changes the place of residence, they will give in writing their changed address to the trial Court as well as to the counsel in the High Court. [2025:RJ-JP:19968] (5 of 5) [SOSA-476/2025]

4. Similarly, if the sureties change their address(s),they will give in writing their changed address to the trial Court. Misc. Application stands disposed of. A copy of this order be sent to learned trial court through E-

9. mail. CHETNA BEHRANI /23(sosa) (ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J