Allowed¶23

Amit Singh Son of Mahendra Singh v. the State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC16 Feb 2026SOSR/17/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Suspension of sentence; Section 438 BNSS; Section 138 NI Act; cheque dishonour; conditional suspension; 40% cheque amount deposit by Demand Draft; personal bond and two sureties; refund with 6% interest undertaking; criminal revision pending; Rajasthan High Court Jaipur Bench; Amit Singh v. State of Rajasthan & Dwarika Prasad; Vinod Kumar Bharwani, J.; SOSR-17/2026; S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 90/2026; custody since 12.01.2026; appearance on 16.03.2026.

What did the court decide?

Suspension of execution of sentence during the pendency of the revision petition, subject to deposit of Rs.60,000/- (40% of cheque amount) by Demand Draft in the name of respondent No.2, personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each, and appearance before the Court on 16.03.2026. ¶23

Amit Singh Son of Mahendra Singh Vs the State of Rajasthan — Cheque Dishonour | Rajasthan HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶23

Issue for consideration

Whether the sentence awarded to the petitioner (conviction under Section 138 of the N.I. Act, affirmed in appeal) should be suspended during the pendency of the revision petition.

¶21

Court's answer

Looking to the term of sentence and without commenting upon the merits of the case, the Court deemed it just and proper to suspend the sentence awarded to the petitioner.

¶22

Ratio / Principle

Execution of the sentence awarded to the petitioner shall remain suspended during the pendency of the revision petition.

¶23

Key takeaways

Suspension is conditional on deposit of 40 per cent of the cheque amount, i.e. Rs.60,000/-, by way of Demand Draft in the name of respondent No.2.ratio¶23
Suspension is further conditional on 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.ratio¶23
The petitioner shall appear before this Court on 16.03.2026 and thereafter as and when called upon to do so.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Rajasthan High Court (Jaipur Bench), Vinod Kumar Bharwani, J. — Application under Section 438 of B.N.S.S. for suspension of sentence filed in pending S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 90/2026 by Amit Singh, convicted under Section 138 of the N.I. Act and sentenced to a maximum of one year simple imprisonment plus fine by the Trial Court (judgment dated 27.09.2024), affirmed in appeal on 10.11.2025; petitioner in custody since 12.01.2026. Application allowed: execution of sentence suspended during pendency of the revision petition, without commenting on merits, subject to deposit of 40% of the cheque amount (Rs.60,000/-) by Demand Draft in favour of respondent No.2, personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each, and appearance on 16.03.2026. Deposited amount to be disbursed to respondent No.2 on an undertaking to refund it with interest @ 6% per annum within two weeks if the petitioner succeeds in the revision petition.

¶1

[2026:RJ-JP:7366]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Suspension of Sentence Application No.17/2026

¶4

¶5

S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 90/2026

¶6

Amit Singh Son Of Mahendra Singh, Aged About 36 Years, Resident Of Near Raghunath Poswal House, In Front Of Wine Shop Wali Gali, Near Maniya Police Station, Maniya, District Dholpur (Rajasthan).

¶7

----Petitioner

¶8

Versus

¶9

The State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp.

¶10

Dwarika Prasad Son Of Late Shankar Singh, Resident Of Pahalwan Colony, Shikhar Bag, G.t. Road, Police Station, Kotwali, Tehsil And District Dholpur (Rajasthan)

¶11

----Respondents

¶12

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Achintya Kaushik For Respondent(s) : Mr. Jaiprakash Tiwari, PP Mr. Udit Sapra

¶13

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI

¶14

Order

¶15

16/02/2026

¶16

This application for suspension of sentence has been filed by the petitioner under Section 438 of B.N.S.S. seeking suspension of sentence awarded by learned Trial Court vide judgment dated 27.09.2024 and affirmed by the learned Appellate Court vide judgment dated 10.11.2025.

¶17

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been convicted by the learned Trial Court for offence(s) under Section 138 of N.I. Act and sentenced with a maximum period of one year simple imprisonment along with fine as per judgment

[2026:RJ-JP:7366]

[SOSR-17/2026]

(2 of 3)

dated 27.09.2024. The petitioner has also filed an appeal before the learned Appellate Court and the same was dismissed, while affirming the judgment of the Trial Court, vide its judgment dated 10.11.2025. Counsel has annexed the Certificate under Rule 311 of High Court Rules, 1952 to the effect that the petitioner was on bail during trial as well as pendency of the appeal and presently, he is behind the bars since 12.01.2026. Counsel also submits that the judgment of conviction & sentence passed by the Trial Court and affirmed by the learned Appellate Court, are totally based upon surmises and conjectures and the revision petition is likely to take long time to conclude. Hence, the sentence awarded to the petitioner may be suspended during the pendency of the revision petition.

¶22

Looking to the term of sentence, without commenting upon the merits of the case & considering the submissions made at bar, this Court deems it just and proper to suspend the sentence awarded to the petitioner.

¶23

Accordingly, this application for suspension of sentence is allowed and it is ordered that the execution of sentence awarded to the petitioner, namely Amit Singh Son Of Mahendra Singh, by the learned Trial Court vide judgment dated 27.09.2024 and affirmed by the learned Appellate Court vide judgment dated 10.11.2025, shall remain suspend during the pendency of the revision petition, provided he shall deposit 40 per cent of cheque amount i.e. Rs.60,000/- by way of Demand Draft in the name of respondent No.2 and shall also furnish a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- together with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each, to the

(3 of 3)

[2026:RJ-JP:7366]

[SOSR-17/2026]

satisfaction of the learned Trial Court with the stipulation that he shall appear before this Court on 16.03.2026 and thereafter, as and when he is called upon to do so.

¶28

On deposit of the aforesaid amount, the same shall be released and disbursed to the respondent No.2 on an undertaking that if the petitioner succeeds in petition, same would be returned to the petitioner with interest @ 6% per annum within a period of two weeks from the disposal of the revision petition.

¶29

(VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI),J

¶30

SAURABH /72

Amit Singh Son of Mahendra Singh v. the State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amit Singh Son of Mahendra Singh v. the 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

Yogendra Singh S/O Ramswaroop Vs State of Rajasthan

Ramsilal S/O Shri Nainuram Vs the State of Rajasthan

Juvenile Conflicting With Law S S/O Shri Faruk (Natural Guardian) Vs State of Rajasthan

Ramdhan Son of Shri Ramlal Vs State of Rajasthan

Mukesh S/O Gola @ Bakhtawar Vs the State of Rajasthan

Deepak Jain Son of Shri Ravindra Jain, Vs State of Rajasthan