Allowed¶24

Kamal Kumar S/O Gopal Krishan v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC16 Apr 2026SOSA/532/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suspension of execution of sentence during pendency of the appeal, subject to furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- together with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court, and appearance before this Court on 16.05.2026 and thereafter as and when called upon. ¶24

Kamal Kumar S/O Gopal Krishan Vs State of Rajasthan — Rajasthan HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶24

Issue for consideration

Whether the sentence awarded to the applicant-appellant (maximum four years rigorous imprisonment with fine, Sessions Case No.22/2015, Ajmer) should be suspended during the pendency of his criminal appeal.

¶15

Court's answer

Taking into consideration the conviction, term of sentence and submissions made at bar, and without commenting upon the merits, this Court deems it just and proper to suspend the sentence awarded to the applicant-appellant during the pendency of the appeal.

¶23

Ratio / Principle

The application for suspension of sentence is allowed; execution of the sentence awarded to Kamal Kumar shall remain suspended during pendency of the appeal, conditional on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court and appearing before this Court on 16.05.2026.

¶24

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan, Bench at Jaipur (Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vinod Kumar Bharwani, author), 16/04/2026 — S.B. Criminal Misc. Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 532/2026 in S.B. Criminal Appeal No.601/2026. Applicant-appellant Kamal Kumar S/o Gopal Krishan, convicted by the learned Special Judge, Narcotics Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act Cases, Ajmer and Additional District & Sessions Judge No.1, Ajmer vide judgments dated 13.02.2026 and 16.02.2026 in Sessions Case No.22/2015, and sentenced to a maximum of four years rigorous imprisonment with fine, sought suspension of sentence under Section 430 of B.N.S.S. Counsel submitted he was on bail during trial, had remained in custody for nine months post-conviction, and that the appeal would take time. Without commenting on merits, the Court allowed the application and ordered suspension of execution of sentence during pendency of the appeal, conditional on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court, and appearance before the Court on 16.05.2026.

¶1

[2026:RJ-JP:16023]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Misc. Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 532/2026

¶4

¶5

S.B. Criminal Appeal No.601/2026

¶6

Kamal Kumar S/o Gopal Krishan, Aged About 58 Years, R/o Gautam Nagar, P.s. Ramganj, Ajmer, (At Present Confined In Central Jail, Ajmer)

¶7

----Appellant

¶8

Versus

¶9

State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor.

¶10

----Respondent

¶11

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Aayush Agarwal For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sudesh Kumar Saini, PP with Mr. Navdeep Singh

¶12

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI

¶13

Order

¶14

16/04/2026

¶15

Instant application for suspension of sentence has been preferred on behalf of the applicant-appellant under Section 430 of B.N.S.S. alongwith the appeal, to suspend the sentence awarded by the Court of learned Special Judge, Narcotics Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act Cases, Ajmer District Ajmer (Raj.) and Additional District & Sessions Judge No.1, Ajmer vide its judgment of conviction & sentence dated 13.02.2026 & 16.02.2026 respectively in Sessions Case No.22/2015, whereby the applicant-appellant was convicted for the alleged offence(s) & sentenced to undergo maximum period of four years rigorous imprisonment with fine.

¶16

Learned counsel appearing for the applicant-appellant submits that the applicant was on bail during trial and he remains

[2026:RJ-JP:16023]

[SOSA-532/2026]

(2 of 2)

in custody for nine months. Counsel further submits that the learned Trial Court has not appreciated the evidence, facts & circumstances of the case holistically and the hearing of the appeal will take its own time, hence, the sentence awarded to the applicant-appellant may be suspended during the pendency of the appeal.

¶21

Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the submissions made herein-above.

¶22

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material made available on record.

¶23

Taking into consideration the conviction, term of sentence & the submissions made at bar and without commenting upon the merits of the case, this Court deems it just and proper to suspend the sentence awarded to the applicant-appellant during the pendency of the appeal.

¶24

Accordingly, the application for suspension of sentence is allowed and it is, hereby, ordered that the execution of sentence awarded to accused-applicant, namely Kamal Kumar S/o Gopal Krishan, by the learned Trial Court shall remain suspended during pendency of the appeal, provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- together with two sureties of Rs.25,000/each, to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court with the stipulation that he shall appear before this Court on 16.05.2026 and thereafter, as and when he is called upon to do so.

¶25

(VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI),J

¶26

SAURABH /55

Kamal Kumar S/O Gopal Krishan v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kamal Kumar S/O Gopal Krishan v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Karudas S/O Shri Jagdish, Vs State of Rajasthan

Anil Son of Bhagwandas, Vs State of Rajasthan

Surendra Son of Brahmanand Vs State of Rajasthan

Kasim S/O. Nuruddin Vs State of Rajasthan

Vishnu S/O Shri Deshraj Vs State of Rajasthan

Sonu Sharma S/O Sajjan Sharma Vs State of Rajasthan