State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p v. Connected

: Mr. Jiya Ur Rahman Mr. Gordhan Singh Fauzdar For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vijay Singh Yadav, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN 29/07/2025 Order

1. These two applications for suspension of sentence are preferred by appellants - Ibra @ Ibran Son Of Mamrej, Handu @ Devo @ Devilal Son Of Samay Singh in pending appeal filed aggrieved from order of conviction and sentence dated

31.08.2024 in Sessions Case No. 46/2018 (32/2014) passed by [2025:RJ-JP:28733] (2 of 5) [SOSA-1687/2024] learned Additional Sessions Judge no.2, Kishangarh Bas, District Alwar whereby appellant Ibra @ Ibran was convicted for offence under Sections 148, 341, 342, 395, 323 of IPC and Section 3/25 of Arms Act and appellant accused Handu @ Devo @ Devilal Son Of Samay Singh was convicted for offence under Sections 148, 341, 342, 395 of IPC and sentenced accordingly.

2. During course of argument, learned counsel offers to withdraw SOS application no. 1687/2024 filed on behalf of Ibra @ Ibran Son Of Mamrej, therefore, this SOS application in criminal appeal no. 2544/2024 is permitted to be dismissed as withdrawn. We are only considering SOS application of Handu @ Devo @ Devilal Son Of Samay Singh.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant while relying upon grounds of appeal submitted that appellant is an innocent person and he was falsely implicated in the instant case. Learned counsel further submits that as per report submitted by SHO P.S. Jurhera only six cases were registered against this appellant and out of which 4 have already been disposed whereas the fifth case is present one and in sixth case he is facing trial. He further submitted that this appellant accused has served substantial part of sentence as he is in custody for quite some time. He further submitted that the appellant undertakes not to indulge in any criminal activity. He also submitted that the appellant is ready and willing to abide by any terms or conditions as imposed by this Hon’ble Court. At last, he submitted that this appellant was on bail during trial and disposal of appeal will take its own time. [2025:RJ-JP:28733] (3 of 5) [SOSA-1687/2024]

4. Aforesaid contentions were opposed by learned Public Prosecutor and he submitted report received from SHO P.S. Jurhera, District Deeg.

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

6. On the basis of report, Ex.P/1 filed by PW-1 Sapan Mohan Garg, FIR No. 98/2014 was registered at P.S. Kishangarh Bas, under Section 382 IPC and after investigation, police has filed charge-sheet against appellants- Ibra @ Ibran, Handu @ Devo @ Devilal and Adil thereafter supplementary charge-sheet was also filed against other persons. After framing charge, prosecution has examined 20 witnesses and exhibited 59 documents. The accused was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and they have not submitted any defence evidence. Learned trial court has convicted appellant Handu @ Devo @ Devilal under Sections 148, 341, 342 and 395 IPC. The maximum sentence awarded to appellant is 7 years.

7. The record suggests that this appellant accused was on bail during trial and he was in custody at the time of pronouncement of judgment dated 31.08.2024. Some of the accused were declared as absconder and trial is pending against them. The custody certificate indicate that this appellant accused has served more than one year and six months out of awarded sentence.

8. Learned public prosecutor has submitted report received from P.S. Jurhera which indicate that only six cases were registered against this appellant. The record/judgment as submitted by learned counsel indicate that in four cases accused [2025:RJ-JP:28733] (4 of 5) [SOSA-1687/2024] was convicted or the cases were disposed of. The disposal of this case will take its own time.

8. At this stage, it is not possible for us to express any opinion on merits of the case, but looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, it is a fit case to enlarge appellant on bail.

9. Therefore, without expressing any opinion on merits, having considered the totality of 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 appellant accused- Handu @ Devo @ Devilal Son Of Samay Singh is suspended till disposal of appeal with the condition that he would 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 his appearance in this court on 20.11.2025 and whenever ordered to do so till the disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated below:-

1. After release of appellant on bail, he 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 he 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, he will give in writing his changed address to the trial Court as well as to the counsel in the High Court. [2025:RJ-JP:28733] (5 of 5) [SOSA-1687/2024]

4. Similarly, if the sureties change their address(s),they will give in writing their changed address to the trial Court.

5. In case, the applicant has violated any condition, then the order of SOS shall be recalled and cancelled.

10. Misc. Application stands disposed of.

11. A copy of this order be sent to learned trial court through E- mail.

12. SOS application no. 1687/2024 filed on behalf of appellant Ibra @ Ibran is hereby dismissed as withdrawn.

13. This Court has passed certain directions on 24.07.2025. The Registrar (Judicial) is directed to list the matter relating to direction separate from these two SOS applications.

14. List on 08.08.2025. CHETNA BEHRANI /5-6(SOSA) (ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J