Rajasthan High Court – Jaipur
Vimlesh Wife Of Shri Rajveer vs State Of Rajasthan on 22 July, 2026
[2026:RJ-JP:28233-DB]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
D.B. Criminal Misc. Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal)
No. 459/2026
URN: SOSA / 901U / 2026
in
D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 105/2026
Vimlesh wife of Shri Rajveer, resident of Village Chainpura, Police
Station Lakhanpur, District Bharatpur (Raj.)
(The Accused-Appellant presently confined at Central Sewar,
District Bharatpur).
----Accused-Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through PP
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajneesh Gupta with
Ms. Chanchal
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Amit Kumar Punia, PP with
Ms. Neha Goyal
Mr. Rajeev Kumar Sogarwal with
Ms. Ayushi Choudhary
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI CHIRANIA
Order
22/07/2026
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
learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nadbai, District Bharatpur (for
short, ‘the learned trial Court’) vide judgment dated 17.02.2026
passed in Session Case No.15/2024 as under:-
1. Under Section 148 IPC: Two years’ simple imprisonment and
fine of ₹1,000/- in default whereof, one month’s additional
additional simple imprisonment.
(Uploaded on 23/07/2026 at 10:35:16 AM)
(Downloaded on 25/07/2026 at 04:27:26 AM)
[2026:RJ-JP:28233-DB] (2 of 4) [SOSA-459/2026]
2. Under Section 341 IPC: One month’s simple imprisonment
and fine of ₹500/- in default whereof, three days’ additional simple
imprisonment.
3. Under Section 504 IPC: Six months’ simple imprisonment
and fine of ₹1,000/- in default thereof, six days’ additional simple
imprisonment.
4. Under Section 323 IPC: Six months’ simple imprisonment
and fine of ₹1,000/- in default thereof, six days’ additional simple
imprisonment.
5. Under Section 307/149 IPC: Seven years’ simple
imprisonment and fine of ₹5,000/- in default thereof, thirty days’
additional simple imprisonment.
6. Under Section 302/149 IPC: Life imprisonment and fine of
₹50,000/- in default thereof, three months’ additional simple
imprisonment.
All the substantive sentences to run concurrently.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that although, it is
alleged against her that she inflicted a lathi blow on the person of
the deceased/injured; but, there is no corresponding grievous or
fatal injury. He further submits that the applicant was on bail
during the trial with no allegation of its misuse and hearing of the
appeal is likely to take time. He, therefore, prays for suspension of
substantive sentence awarded to her.
Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor, assisted by learned
counsel for the complainant, opposing the submissions, contended
that there is specific allegation against the applicant of
participating in the crime of murder being a member of unlawful
assembly and therefore, she does not deserve indulgence of
(Uploaded on 23/07/2026 at 10:35:16 AM)
(Downloaded on 25/07/2026 at 04:27:26 AM)
[2026:RJ-JP:28233-DB] (3 of 4) [SOSA-459/2026]
suspension of sentence application. He, therefore, prays for
dismissal of the application.
Heard. Considered.
From the record, it is revealed that although, allegation
against the applicant is of participation in the crime being a
member of unlawful assembly which, in furtherance of common
object, caused death of Dharamveer and grievous injury to
Rajveer which was found to be dangerous to life; but, specific
allegation against her is of using a lathi and indisputably, there is
no corresponding grievous or fatal injury with it on the person of
either the deceased or, the injured. The applicant was on bail
during the trial with no allegation of misuse of liberty. Possibility of
the appeal being heard in near future is bleak. In the aforesaid
factual backdrop and especially, keeping in view that the applicant
is a female, we deem it just and proper to allow the suspension of
sentence application.
Accordingly, the suspension of sentence application is
allowed. Substantive sentence awarded to the applicant-Vimlesh
W/o Shri Rajveer by the learned trial Court vide judgment dated
17.02.2026 shall remain suspended during pendency of the appeal
and she shall be released on bail provided she furnishes bail bonds
to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court to the effect that she
shall appear before this Court on 21.08.2026 and as and when
called upon to do so till disposal of the appeal and subject to the
following conditions:-
1. That she will appear before the
learned trial Court in the month of January of
every year till the appeal is decided.
(Uploaded on 23/07/2026 at 10:35:16 AM)
(Downloaded on 25/07/2026 at 04:27:26 AM)
[2026:RJ-JP:28233-DB] (4 of 4) [SOSA-459/2026]
2. That if the applicant changes the place
of residence, she will give in writing her changed
address to the learned trial Court as well as to
her learned counsel in the High Court who shall,
in turn, inform this Court.
3. Similarly, if the sureties change their
address(es), they will give in writing their
changed address to the learned trial Court.
The learned trial Court shall keep the record of attendance of
the accused-applicant in a separate file. Such file be registered as
Criminal Misc. Case relating to original case in which the accused-
applicant was tried and convicted. A copy of this order shall also
be placed in that file for ready reference. Criminal Misc. file shall
not be taken into account for statistical purpose relating to
pendency and disposal of the case in the learned trial Court. In
case, the said accused-applicant does not appear before the
learned trial Court, the learned trial Judge shall report the matter
to the High Court for cancellation of benefit extended by this
order.
(RAVI CHIRANIA),J (MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL),J
48/Tahir
(Uploaded on 23/07/2026 at 10:35:16 AM)
(Downloaded on 25/07/2026 at 04:27:26 AM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
