Dismissed

Satyapal Singh Alias Satpal S/O Shri Mangelal v. the State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC4 Feb 2026SOSA/82/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Suspension of sentence applications by a mother and son convicted under Sections 498-A and 302 IPC for burning the daughter-in-law. The court preferred the magistrate-recorded dying declaration containing specific dowry-harassment allegations over the earlier one, found no perversity in the trial court's reasoning, and dismissed the applications.

What the court decided

AI extract

Satyapal Singh Alias Satpal S/O Shri Mangelal Vs the… — Dowry and Cruelty | Rajasthan HC (2026)

¶1

[2026:RJ-JP:5142-DB]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

D.B. Criminal Misc. Suspension of Sentence Application No.

¶4

82/2026

¶5

¶6

D.B. Criminal Appeal No.426/2025

¶7

Satyapal Singh Alias Satpal S/o Shri Mangelal, Resident Of Undera, Police Station Fatehpur Sikri, District Agra (Uttar Pradesh)

¶8

----Accused Appellant

¶9

Versus

¶10

The State of Rajasthan, Through the PP.

¶11

----Non-Appellant

¶12

Connected With

¶13

D.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application No. 2045/2025

¶14

¶15

D.B. Criminal Appeal No.426/2025

¶16

Mrs. Bhuridevi W/o Mangelal, Resident Of Undera, PS Fatehpur Sikri, District Agra (Uttar Pradesh). At Present In Central Jail, Bharatpur.

¶17

----Accused Appellant

¶18

Versus

¶19

The State of Rajasthan, through the PP

¶20

----Non-Appellant

¶21

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr.	Darmendra Choudhary
For Respondent(s)	: Mr.	Rhishi Raj Singh Rathore, P.P. with
	Ms.	Neha Goyal
	Mr.	Vinod Sharma

¶22

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN

Judgment / Order

04/02/2026

[2026:RJ-JP:5142-DB]

[SOSA-82/2026]

(2 of 3)

These suspension of sentence applications under Section 430 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 have been filed by the accused-applicants (for brevity, “the applicants”) alongwith the appeal. The applicants have been convicted and sentenced by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Women Harassment Cases), Bharatpur (Raj.) vide judgment dated 12.09.2025 passed in Sessions Case No.05/2020 (CIS No.27/2020) as under:-

¶29

1. Under Section 498-A IPC: Three years’ rigorous imprisonment and fine of ₹5,000/- each in default thereof, three months’ additional simple imprisonment.

¶30

2. Under Section 302 IPC : Life imprisonment and fine of ₹20,000/- each in default thereof, six months’ additional simple imprisonment.

¶31

Learned counsel for the applicants, inviting attention of this Court towards the dying declaration dated 03.06.2019 (Exhibit P- 11), would submit that therein, the deceased has levelled no allegation against them either of harassment on account of demand of dowry or of setting her on fire. He submits that from the prosecution testimony, it is not established that the applicantSmt. Bhuridevi was present at the time of incident. Learned counsel submits that they were on bail during trial and prays that the substantive sentence awarded to them be suspended during pendency of the appeal.

¶32

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposed the prayer and prays for dismissal of the applications.

¶33

Heard. Considered.

¶34

Indisputably, the deceased has died unnatural death within a period less than two years from the date of her marriage. While

[2026:RJ-JP:5142-DB]

[SOSA-82/2026]

(3 of 3)

recording conviction of the appellants under Sections 498-A and 302 IPC, the learned trial Court has relied upon, amongst others, the dying declaration dated 14.06.2019 (Exhibit P-10) recorded by Ms. Rekha Tiwari, learned Additional Chief Judicial and Metropolitan Magistrate No. 2, Jaipur Metropolitan (PW-9), which contains specific allegations against the applicants of subjecting her to torture and harassment for demand of dowry soon before her death as also that she was set on fire by them. The learned trial Court has assigned cogent reasons for disbelieving the dying declaration (Exhibit P-11) and on perusal of the record, we do not find the same to be perverse.

¶39

In view of the specific allegations in the dying declaration (Exhibit P-10), we are not inclined to extend the benefit of suspension of sentence to them.

¶40

Accordingly, the suspension of sentence applications are dismissed.

¶41

(SAMEER JAIN),J

¶42

(MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL),J

¶43

Manish/10-11

Satyapal Singh Alias Satpal S/O Shri Mangelal v. the State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Satyapal Singh Alias Satpal S/O Shri Mangelal v. the State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shivji @ Soji Meena S/O Shri Kishna Lal Meena Vs State of Rajasthan

The Additional Chief Secretary, Finance Department Vs Radheshyam Meena S/O Sh. Shivcharanlal Meena

Manoj Son of Late Surajkaran Vs State of Rajasthan

Sardar@Bala@Balu Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Dhanpal Meena S/O Surajan Meena Vs State of Rajasthan

Hemant Kumar Rawal S/O. Ghanshyam Rawal Vs State of Rajasthan