Suspension of sentence application by a convicted murderer pending appeal was dismissed; court found trial court findings on ocular and medical evidence not perverse.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
[2026:RJ-JP:6932-DB]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
D.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 1053/2024
In
D.B. Criminal Appeal No.202/2024
Mahesh Babu S/o Kalluram @ Kaluram, Aged About 28 Years, R/o House No. 391, Keshavpura, Sector 4, Police Station Mahaveer Nagar, Kota (Presently Confined In District Jail Kota)
----Accused/Appellant
...Respondent
----Complainant
| For Petitioner(s) | : Mr. Mr. |
Gaurav Sharma for Nitin Kumar Sharma |
|---|---|---|
| For Respondent(s) | : Mr. |
Vijay Singh Yadav, PP with |
| Ms. | Neha Goyal |
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN Order
13/02/2026
This suspension of sentence application under Section 430 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the accused-applicant (for brevity, “the applicant”) alongwith the appeal. The applicant has been convicted and sentenced by the Court of Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities Case), Kota (for short, ‘the learned trial Court’) vide judgment dated 30.04.2024 passed in Sessions Case No.28/2019 (CIS No.28/2019) as under:-
[2026:RJ-JP:6932-DB]
[SOSA-1053/2024]
(2 of 2)
Sentences to run concurrently.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that he has falsely been implicated in this case and the learned trial Court has recorded his conviction even in absence of any legally admissible evidence against him. Learned counsel submits that he is in custody for a period of about two years and six months and prays for suspension of sentence.
Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposed the prayer.
Heard. Considered.
A perusal of the judgment impugned dated 30.04.2024 reflects that relying upon the ocular evidence including the testimony of PW3- Pintu Kumar Yadav, it was held that the applicant has inflicted a knife blow on the vital part of the body of the deceased which is medically corroborated, as is apparent from the testimony of Dr. Vinod Garg (PW14). After perusal of the record, we do not find any perversity in the findings so recorded by the learned trial Court.
In view of the aforesaid evidence and looking to the nature and gravity of allegation against the applicant, we are not inclined to allow the application.
Resultantly, the suspension of sentence application is dismissed.
(SAMEER JAIN),J
(MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL),J
DIKSHA /6
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the sentence of conviction for murder should be suspended pending appeal under Section 430 BNSS?
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Mahesh Babu S/o Kalluram @ Kaluram
State Of Rajasthan
Guddi W/o Chandraprakash
Mahendar Kumar Goyal
Sameer Jain
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
