Shakuntala W/O Rampal Vs State of Rajasthan

The instant application for suspension of sentence is preferred by appellant Shakuntala W/o Rampal aggrieved from order of conviction and sentence dated 06.12.2024 in Sessions Case No.20/2012 passed by learned Additional District and Sessions Judge No.4, Kotputli whereby appellant was convicted for offence under Sections 341, 323/34, 325/34, 326/34, 307/34 IPC and sentenced accordingly.

¶16

Learned counsel for the appellant while relying upon grounds of appeal submitted that appellant is an innocent person and she was falsely implicated. He further submitted that appellant is a female and after hearing noise of altercation, she intervened just to save her son. He submitted that there was no allegation upon

¶17

[2025:RJ-JP:15617]

¶18

[SOSA-2383/2024]

¶19

(2 of 4)

¶20

petitioner to assault injured PW-3 Subhash. He further referred statement of PW-3 and submitted that he did not made any allegation upon present appellant for assaulting him by any weapon. He further referred the discrepancies in the statement of material witnesses and submitted that appellant has strong case to succeed in the appeal and disposal of appeal will take its own time. He also submitted that appellant was on bail during trial, and did not misused liberty granted to him. He also submitted that there was a cross-case wherein also complainant party were convicted.

¶21

Aforesaid contentions were opposed by learned Public Prosecutor. He submitted custody certificate and same is taken on record.

¶22

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

¶23

On the basis of report dated 05.06.2012 submitted by complainant Vikram Singh about assaulting on his brother, FIR NO.199/2012 was registered at P.S. Paragpura, Jaipur Rural and after investigation, police has filed charge-sheet against Vijay, Vikas and Shakuntla under Sections 341, 323/34, 325/34, 326/34, 307/34 IPC.

¶24

Learned trial court after framing charge has proceeded to examine witnesses produced by the prosecution. The injured was examined as PW-3 whereas medical jurist Dr. Satish was examined as PW-6 and other doctors as PW-10 Arun and PW-12 Subhash Agarwal. IO was examined as PW-9. The trial court after considering evidence on record has convicted appellant along with

[2025:RJ-JP:15617]

[SOSA-2383/2024]

(3 of 4)

two other persons under Sections 323, 341, 325, 326, 307 read with 34 IPC.

¶29

Having considered that appellant is a female and she was on bail during trial and disposal of appeal will take its own time, therefore it is appropriate to release appellant on bail.

¶30

Therefore, without expressing any opinion on merits, 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- Shakuntala W/o Rampal is suspended till disposal of appeal with the condition that she 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 her appearance in this court on 23.07.2025 and whenever ordered to do so till the disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated below:-

¶31

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

¶32

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

¶33

That if the applicant changes the place of residence, she will give in writing her changed address to the trial Court as well as to the counsel in the High Court.

(4 of 4)

[2025:RJ-JP:15617]

[SOSA-2383/2024]