Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Narayan vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:29576) on 8 July, 2025
Author: Farjand Ali
Bench: Farjand Ali
[2025:RJ-JD:29576]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal)
No. 821/2025
in
S.B. Criminal Appeal No.176/2025
Narayan S/o Nanji, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Kaya Jada Adva, Ps
Goverdhan Vilas, Dist. Udaipur. (Lodged In Central Jail Udaipur)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Surendra Singh
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Surendra Bishnoi, AGA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI
Order
08/07/2025
1. The instant application for suspension of sentence has been
moved on behalf of the applicant in the matter of judgment dated
02.09.2024 passed by the learned Special Judge (POCSO Act
Cases) No.2, District Udaipur in Sessions Case No..40/2023
whereby he was convicted and sentenced to suffer maximum
imprisonment of 20 years under Section 5/6 of POCSO Act and
lesser punishment for the other offences under Sections 376(2)(N)
of IPC.
2. It is contended by the learned counsel for the appellant that
the learned trial Judge has not appreciated the correct, legal and
factual aspects of the matter and thus, reached at an erroneous
conclusion of guilt, therefore, the same is required to be
appreciated again by this court being the first appellate Court.
[2025:RJ-JD:29576] (2 of 5) [SOSA-821/2025]
Hearing of the appeal is likely to take long time, therefore, the
application for suspension of sentence may be granted.
3. Per contra, learned public prosecutor has vehemently
opposed the prayer made by learned counsel for the accused-
applicant for releasing the appellant on application for suspension
of sentence.
4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the
material available on record.
5. Service is already affected upon complainant/victim and her
guardian, but no one appeared.
Even the glimpse over the statement of PW-2, the victim,
would give a candid suggestion that she was in relation with the
appellant and on the day of incident upon tryst fixed, she went to
meet the appellant and as such it is clear that neither she was
coxed nor forcibly taken away rather she made a false pretext to
go to school and surreptitiously went to meet the appellant.
Whereafter, she went to different places with appellant on the
motorcycle driven by him and lastly went to the house of sister of
appellant where they stayed for around seven days. After seven
days, she was handed over to her father since a criminal case was
registered. The circumstances are strongly suggesting that she
was all over a consenting party, however a definite finding is not
being given by this Court at this stage since it would influence the
mertis of trial.
Though the consent of a minor does not bear relevance for
either fornication or sexual relationship, but when gone through
incisively, it is noticed that a serious in-congruence is there in P1,
P2 and P3 which were produced by the prosecution for
[2025:RJ-JD:29576] (3 of 5) [SOSA-821/2025]
determining the age of victim. Exhibit-P1 is a letter given by the
principal of Government Senior Secondary School, Dakan Kotra,
Girwa, District Udaipur informing lost of some relevant papers.
Exhibit-P2 is an admission form which has a mentioning of date of
birth as 12.12.2005 in para-2 and in para-9, the date of filing of
the admission form is mentioned as 13.07.2010, however, when a
declaration was made at the bottom, the date is mentioned as
13.07.2012. Sometimes it may be a human error or an error in
mentioning the digits, but when compared with the other
documents, some significant discrepancies can be noticed easily.
Exhibit-P2 speaks about admission of the victim in Class-I whilst
Exhibit-P3 which is scholar register and which in original course of
government record as per Section 35 of Indian Evidence Act
should have corresponding entries and endorsement. Exhibit-P3,
the scholar register, speaks about admission of the victim on
11.08.2015 due to transfer. The endorsement made in the first
column of Exhibit-P3 makes it abundantly clear that the girl must
have been admitted in some other school and in the Government
Senior Secondary School, Girwa, she was admitted on 11.08.2015
due to transfer. This document further clarifies about her
admission in Class-IV because of having six entries from Class-IV
to Class-X. The document Exhibit-P3-A clarifies that uptill Class-
III, the girl must have studied somewhere else. However, case of
the prosecution is silent on this aspect. Be that as it may, this
Court would desist from making any remark on this owing to some
constraints, however looking to the circumstances appearing in
the case and the statement of witness at this stage and hearing of
the appeal would likely to take a long time, this court is of the
[2025:RJ-JD:29576] (4 of 5) [SOSA-821/2025]
opinion that it is a fit case for suspending the sentence awarded to
the accused-appellant.
6. Accordingly, the application for suspension of sentence filed
under Section 389 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the
sentence passed by learned trial court, the details of which are
provided in the first para of this order, against the appellant-
applicant named above shall remain suspended till final disposal of
the aforesaid appeal and he shall be released on bail provided he
executes 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 08.09.2025 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 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
[2025:RJ-JD:29576] (5 of 5) [SOSA-821/2025]
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.
(FARJAND ALI),J
100-chhavi/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
