Allowed¶24

Hari Singh S/O Gangasahai v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC7 May 2026SOSA/789/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Rajasthan HC Jaipur (Uma Shanker Vyas, J., 07/05/2026): suspension of sentence application allowed in S.B. Criminal Appeal No.891/2026 arising from conviction/sentence in Sessions Case No.26/2015 of Hari Singh (then Assistant Public Prosecutor, A.C.J.M. Court No. 4, Kota); bail on personal bond Rs.1,00,000/- and two sureties Rs.50,000/- each, subject to deposit of fine; appearance fixed for 08.06.2026; no merits commented upon; no statutes or precedents cited.

What did the court decide?

Suspension of sentence during pendency of the appeal, subject to deposition of the fine imposed by the learned trial Court; release on bail on personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties of Rs.50,000/- each; appearance before the Court on 08.06.2026. ¶24

Hari Singh S/O Gangasahai Vs State of Rajasthan — Rajasthan HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶24

Issue for consideration

Whether the sentence of imprisonment awarded to the accused-applicant Hari Singh in Sessions Case No.26/2015 should be suspended during the pendency of S.B. Criminal Appeal No.891/2026, and on what conditions.

¶15

Court's answer

Subject to deposition of the fine imposed by the learned trial Court, the application for suspension of sentence is allowed and the sentence awarded to the applicant shall remain suspended during pendency of the appeal.

¶24

Ratio / Principle

The accused-applicant is to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties of Rs.50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.

¶24

Key takeaways

Release is subject to the stipulation that the accused-applicant shall appear before this Court on 08.06.2026 and thereafter as and when called upon to do so.ratio¶24
The Court expressly refrained from commenting upon the merits/demerits of the case while passing the suspension order.obiter¶23

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Suspension of sentence — Application (Appeal) No. 789/2026 in S.B. Criminal Appeal No.891/2026 — applicant Hari Singh S/o Gangasahai, the then Assistant Public Prosecutor First Class, A.C.J.M. Court No. 4, Kota, sentenced by the learned trial Court in Sessions Case No.26/2015 — trial Court had earlier suspended sentence for one month — applicant willing to deposit the entire fine amount; final hearing of the appeal likely to take time — without commenting upon merits/demerits, sentence suspended during pendency of the appeal subject to deposition of fine; applicant to be released on bail on personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties of Rs.50,000/- each, to appear before the Court on 08.06.2026 — application allowed (Uma Shanker Vyas, J.; decided 07/05/2026).

¶1

[2026:RJ-JP:19390]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Misc. Suspension of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 789/2026

¶4

¶5

S.B. Criminal Appeal No.891/2026

¶6

Hari Singh S/o Gangasahai, Resident of Village Atrampura, Police Station Chetoli, Tehsil Weir, District Bharatpur the Then Assistant Public Prosecutor First Class, A.C.J.M. Court No. 4, Kota.

¶7

----Petitioner

¶8

Versus

¶9

State of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor.

¶10

----Respondent

¶11

For Petitioner(s)	:	Mr. Kapil Gupta, Adv.
		Mr. Dharmendra Kumar, Adv.
		Mr. Ankit Kumar,Adv.
For Respondent(s)	:	Mr. Devi Singh,P.P.

¶12

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMA SHANKER VYAS

¶13

Judgment / Order

¶14

07/05/2026

¶15

Heard learned counsel for the parties on the application filed for suspension of sentence and perused the entire material available on record.

¶16

Learned counsel for the accused-applicant submits that there is no reliable and legally acceptable evidence to hold the accusedapplicant guilty for the alleged offence(s) and there is every likelihood of succeeding in the criminal appeal. Learned counsel further submits that sentence of the accused-applicant has already been suspended by the learned trial Court for a period of one month. He further submits that accused-applicant is willing to deposit the entire fine amount and as final hearing of the appeal is

[2026:RJ-JP:19390]

[SOSA-789/2026]

(2 of 2)

likely to take time thus sentence of the accused-applicant may be suspended.

¶21

Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer regarding suspension of sentence.

¶22

I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties.

¶23

Without commenting upon the merits/demerits of the case and considering the arguments advanced by the parties, this Court deems it just and proper to suspend the sentence awarded to the applicant.

¶24

Accordingly, subject to deposition of fine imposed by the learned trial Court on the accused-applicant, the application for suspension of sentence is allowed and it is ordered that the sentence of imprisonment awarded by the learned trial Court to the accused-applicant namely, Hari Singh S/o Gangasahai in Sessions Case No.26/2015 shall remain suspended during pendency of the appeal and he shall be released on bail, provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- along with two sureties in the sum of Rs.50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court with the stipulation that he shall appear before this Court on 08.06.2026 and thereafter as and when called upon to do so.

¶25

(UMA SHANKER VYAS),J

¶26

YOGESH KUMAR /122

Hari Singh S/O Gangasahai v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hari Singh S/O Gangasahai 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

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ankit S/O Ranjeet Vs State of Rajasthan

Vikram Son of Revadya Vs State of Rajasthan

Sharwan Lal Son of Ranglal Vs State of Rajasthan

Vinay Kumar S/O Ratanlal, Vs Pradeep Singh S/O Bhawar Singh

Ganesh @ Ganeshram S/O Ruparam Vs State of Rajasthan

Titu@ Jagir Singh Son Shri Mansingh Vs State of Rajasthan