Allowed

Teekaram Son of Prahlad v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC16 Oct 2025SOSA/2072/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Appellants convicted under Sections 452, 323/34 and 504/34 IPC with a maximum three-year sentence sought suspension of sentence pending appeal. The High Court allowed the application and released them on specified bail conditions.

What did the court decide?

Sentence suspended till disposal of appeal; release on personal bond Rs.1,00,000 with two sureties Rs.50,000 each, subject to fine deposit and conditions

Teekaram Son of Prahlad Vs State of Rajasthan — Bail and Remand | Rajasthan HC (2025)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Misc. Suspension of Sentence Application

¶3

No.2072/2025

¶4

¶5

S.B. Criminal Appeal (SB) No. 2747/2025

¶6

Teekaram Son Of Prahlad, Aged About 35 Years, Resident Of Borif, Police Station Kotwali, Sawai Madhopur (Raj.)

¶7

Siyaram Son Of Harichand, Aged About 26 Years, Resident Of Borif, Police Station Kotwali, Sawai Madhopur (Raj.)

¶8

Rajesh Son Of Hanuman, Aged About 30 Years, Resident Of Borif, Police Station Kotwali, Sawai Madhopur (Raj.)

¶9

----Appellants

¶10

Versus

¶11

State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

¶12

----Respondent

¶13

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Girish Khandelwal For Respondent(s) : Mr. Amit Punia, Addl.GA/PP

¶14

JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND

¶15

Order

¶16

16/10/2025

¶17

Counsel for the appellants submits that the appellants have been convicted for the offence punishable under Sections 452, 323/34 and 504/34 IPC and the maximum sentence awarded to the appellants is three years, which has already been suspended by the Trial Court and disposal of the appeal is bound to take time, so the sentence awarded to the appellants be suspended till disposal of the appeal.

¶18

[CRLAS-2747/2025]

¶19

(2 of 3)

¶20

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposed the suspension of sentence application.

¶21

Heard and considered the submissions made at the Bar and perused the material available on record.

¶22

Considering the arguments put forward by the counsel for the appellants and looking to the fact that the maximum sentence awarded to the appellants is three years, which has already been suspended by the Trial Court and looking to the fact that disposal of the appeal is likely to take time, therefore, this Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case for suspending the sentence awarded to the accused-appellants. 5. Accordingly, the application for suspension of sentence filed by the applicants is allowed and the sentence awarded by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Sawai Madhopur vide judgment dated 24.09.2025 in Sessions Case No.54/2022 against the appellants Teekaram son of Prahlad, Siyaram son of Harichand and Rajesh son of Hanuman shall remain suspended till final disposal of the aforesaid appeal, subject to the condition that the appellants shall deposit the fine amount, as imposed by the Trial Court and they shall be released on bail provided each of them execute a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties of Rs.50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court for appearance before this Court on 17.11.2025 and whenever ordered to do so, till the disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated below:-

¶23

[CRLAS-2747/2025]

¶24

(3 of 3)

¶25

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

¶26

That if the applicants change the place of residence and mobile number, they will give in writing their changed address and mobile number to the trial Court as well as to the counsel in the High Court.

¶27

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

¶28

Appellants shall deposit a fine amount as imposed by the learned trial Court.

¶29

In case the applicants-appellants are found involved in committing and repeating the same offence again, the State/complainant would be at liberty to move application for cancellation of bail.

¶30

The learned trial Court shall maintain the record of attendance of the accused-appellants in a separate file. Such file be registered as Criminal Misc. Case relating to the original case in which the accused-appellants were tried and convicted. A copy of this order shall also be placed in that file for ready reference. Such Criminal Misc. file shall not be taken into account for statistical purpose relating to pendency and disposal of cases in the trial court.

¶31

In case the said accused-appellants do not appear before the trial court and commit any default, the learned trial Judge shall report the matter to the High Court for cancellation of bail.

¶32

(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J

¶33

KuD/30

Teekaram Son of Prahlad v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Teekaram Son of Prahlad v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Hari Prakash Pareek S/O Shri Laxminarayan Vs Om Prakash Pareek Son of Shri Balram Pareek

Vishal Malawat S/O Shri Gopal Malawat Vs State of Rajasthan

Patelaram @ Patel S/O Shriram Vs State of Rajasthan

Vinod Kumar S/O Shri Bholaram Vs the State of Rajasthan

Vakil S/O Nuru @ Noor Mohammad Vs State of Rajasthan

Nadeem S/O Rujdar Vs State of Rajasthan