Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Mahendra Singh Alias Buchar vs State Of Rajasthan (2026:Rj-Jd:38) on 5 January, 2026
Author: Farjand Ali
Bench: Farjand Ali
[2026:RJ-JD:38]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal)
No. 2063/2025
1. Mahendra Singh Alias Buchar S/o Ashok Singh Rawat,
Aged About 34 Years, R/o Lakhaguda, Police Station
Devgarh, District Rajsamand Rajasthan. (Central Jail In
Rajsamand)
2. Shankar Singh S/o Dau Singh Rawat, Aged About 32
Years, R/o Telda, Lakhan Guda, Police Station Devgarh,
District Rajsamand. Rajasthan. (Central Jail In
Rajsamand)
3. Prakash Singh Alias Prakash S/o Dau Singh Rawat, Aged
About 30 Years, R/o Telda, Lakhan Guda, Dhanwala Kala,
Bhaggad, Police Station Devgarh, District Rajsamand.
Rajasthan. (Central Jail In Rajsamand)
4. Surendra Singh S/o Bhanwar Singh Rawat, Aged About 29
Years, R/o Lakhaguda, Police Station Devgarh, District
Rajsamand. Rajasthan. (Central Jail In Rajsamand)
5. Kailash Singh S/o Bhagwan Singh Rawat, Aged About 31
Years, R/o Kachhbali Payari, Police Station Devgarh,
District Rajsamand. Rajasthan. (Central Jail In
Rajsamand)
----Petitioners
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Harendra Singh, brother of the
applicant No.1
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Surendra Bishnoi, AGA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI
Order 05/01/2026
1. The instant application for suspension of sentence has been moved on behalf of the applicants in the matter of judgment (Uploaded on 06/01/2026 at 02:31:09 PM) (Downloaded on 06/01/2026 at 08:41:55 PM) [2026:RJ-JD:38] (2 of 4) [SOSA-2063/2025] dated 28.10.2025 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Rajsamand in Sessions Case No.13/2017 whereby they were convicted and sentenced to suffer maximum imprisonment of 5 years under Section 436/149 of IPC and lesser punishment for the other offences under Sections 457/149, 148, 147 of the IPC.
2. Lawyers are abstaining from giving appearance.
3. It is contended on behalf of the applicants 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. They were on bail during trial and did not misuse the liberty so granted to them; hearing of the appeal is likely to take long time, therefore, the application for suspension of sentence may be granted.
4. Per contra, learned public prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer made on behalf of the accused-applicants for releasing the applicants on application for suspension of sentence.
5. Heard and perused the material available on record.
6. It would be highly debatable for the prosecution, and also cumbersome, to establish which among the forty persons named by the complainant, Gesa Singh Chauhan, in the First Information Report had actually set the house ablaze. The selective prosecution of only five applicants, while leaving aside the remaining thirty-five accused, raises a question that remains open for consideration by both parties. The appeal (Uploaded on 06/01/2026 at 02:31:09 PM) (Downloaded on 06/01/2026 at 08:41:55 PM) [2026:RJ-JD:38] (3 of 4) [SOSA-2063/2025] has already been admitted, and the applicants have been incarcerated for a considerable period of time.
7. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and looking to the totality of facts and circumstances of the case, more particularly the facts/fact that the accused- petitioner was on bail during the course of trial and the hearing of appeal is likely to take further more time and considering the overall submissions while refraining from passing any comments on the niceties of the matter and the defects of the prosecution as the same may put an adverse effect on hearing of the appeal, this court is of the opinion that it is a fit case for suspending the sentence awarded to the accused-petitioner.
8. 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-applicant named above shall remain suspended till final disposal of the aforesaid appeal and they shall be released on bail provided they 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 their appearance in this court on 05.02.2026 and whenever ordered to do so till the disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated below:-
(Uploaded on 06/01/2026 at 02:31:09 PM) (Downloaded on 06/01/2026 at 08:41:55 PM) [2026:RJ-JD:38] (4 of 4) [SOSA-2063/2025] (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 change 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.
(3) Similarly, if the sureties change their addresses, they will give in writing their changed address to the trial Court.
(FARJAND ALI),J 174-Samvedana/-
(Uploaded on 06/01/2026 at 02:31:09 PM) (Downloaded on 06/01/2026 at 08:41:55 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)