Monday, 08, Jun, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Xxx (Imaginary Name ) vs State Of Rajasthan (2024:Rj-Jp:42854)
2024 Latest Caselaw 6100 Raj/2

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 6100 Raj/2
Judgement Date : 10 October, 2024

Rajasthan High Court

Xxx (Imaginary Name ) vs State Of Rajasthan (2024:Rj-Jp:42854) on 10 October, 2024

Author: Anil Kumar Upman

Bench: Anil Kumar Upman

[2024:RJ-JP:42854]

        HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                    BENCH AT JAIPUR

 S.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal)
                                  No. 833/2024

                                          In

                     S.B. Criminal Appeal No.3513/2023

Xxx (Imaginary Name ), Aged About 21 Years, (Resident Of
Victim Village/ Neighbor) (At Present Confined In Central Jail,
Ajmer)
                                                                       ----Petitioner
                                       Versus
1.       State Of Rajasthan, Through Its PP
2.       Xxx, R/o
                                                                    ----Respondents
For Petitioner(s)            :     Mr. Vinay Pal Yadav
For Respondent(s)            :     Mr. Amit Punia, PP



           HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN

                                        Order

10/10/2024
1.    Heard     learned     counsel        for    the     applicant-appellant    and

learned State Counsel on the application for suspension of

execution of sentence.

2. The applicant-appellant herein h as been convicted for the

offences punishable under Sections 363, 366, 376 & 342 of IPC

and Section 3/4 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offence Act,

2012 vide judgment dated 21.11.2023 passed by learned Special

Judge, Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 &

Commission for Protection of Child Rights Act, 2005, No.1, Ajmer

(Raj.) in Sessions Case No.29/2023 and has been sentenced to

maximum punishment of ten years.

[2024:RJ-JP:42854] (2 of 4) [SOSA-833/2024]

3. Learned counsel for the appellant-applicant submits that

appellant-applicant has wrongly been convicted by the learned

trial Court. Counsel submits that learned trial Court has failed to

appreciate the evidence available on record in correct perspective.

Counsel submits that at the time of alleged incident, victim was at

the verge of majority (about 17 years and 5 months). Counsel

submits that at initial, in her statement under Section 161 Cr.PC ,

it was clearly mentioned that by victim that her parents wanted to

marry her against her wish so she left the parental home on her

own will with the appellant. Counsel submits that at the time of

alleged incident, appellant was also aged about 21 years. Counsel

submits that there is not evidence available on record suggesting

that at any point of time, actual age was disclosed by the victim to

the appellant. Counsel submits that during trial appellant was on

bail and he did not misuse the liberty of bail. Counsel further

submits that appellant has suffered incarceration of about one

year and nine months till date and there is no immediate prospect

of this appeal being heard and disposed of in near future.

4. Learned State counsel opposes the submissions made by

counsel for the appellant. He submits that victim was below 18

years. He further submits that victim/complainant of this case has

duly been informed about this application for suspension of

execution of sentence, but despite information, no one has put in

appearance on behalf of the complainant.

5. Upon a consideration of the arguments advanced on behalf

of counsel for the appellant and learned State Counsel and having

regard to the facts and circumstances as available on the record

[2024:RJ-JP:42854] (3 of 4) [SOSA-833/2024]

and especially the fact that at the time of alleged incident, victim

was at the verge of majority and appellant was also 21 years old;

victim left her parental home on her own will; during trial

appellant was on bail; appellant has suffered incarceration of one

year and nine months till date, this Court is of the opinion that the

appellant has available to him strong grounds to assail the

impugned judgment of conviction and sentence. Thus, it is a fit

case for suspending the sentences awarded to the applicant-

appellant during pendency of the instant appeal.

6. Accordingly, the application for suspension of sentence filed

under Section 389 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the

sentences passed by the learned Special Judge, Protection of

Children from Sexual Offences Act & Commission for Protection of

Child Rights Act, 2005, No.1, Ajmer (Raj.) vide judgment dated

21.11.2023 in Sessions Case No.29/2023 against the appellant-

applicant Xxx (Imaginary Name ) shall remain suspended till

final disposal of the aforesaid appeal and he shall be released on

bail, provided he execute a personal bond in the sum of

Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the

satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for his appearance in this

court on 12.11.2024 and whenever ordered to do so till the

disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated below:-

1. That he will appear before the trial Court in the month of January of every year till the appeal is decided.

2. That if the applicant changes the place of residence, he will give in writing his changed

[2024:RJ-JP:42854] (4 of 4) [SOSA-833/2024]

address to the trial Court as well as to the counsel in the High Court.

3. Similarly, if the sureties change their address(s), they will give in writing their changed address to the trial Court.

7. 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 related 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 cases in the trial court. In case the said

accused applicant does not appear before the trial court, the

learned trial Judge shall report the matter to the High Court for

cancellation of bail.

(ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J

LALIT MOHAN /65

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : MAIMS

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter