Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Gagandeep Singh vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:22626) on 9 May, 2025
Author: Farjand Ali
Bench: Farjand Ali
[2025:RJ-JD:22626]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal)
No. 619/2025
In
S.B. Criminal Appeal No.673/2025
Sunil Singh S/o Indra Singh, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Chak No.
5, Ssw Jhambar, P.s. Hanumangarh Town, Tehsil And District
Hanumangarh. (Lodged At District Jail, Hanumangarh)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent
Connected With
S.B. Criminal Suspension of Sentence Application (Appeal)
No.574/2025
In
S.B. Criminal Appeal (Sb) No. 604/2025
Gagandeep Singh S/o Shri Jaskaran Singh, Aged About 28 Years,
R/o Chak 5 Ssw Jhambar, Tehsil And District Hanumangarh.
(Presently Lodged In District Jail Hanumangarh)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. M.S. Soni
Mr. N.S. Budania
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Suresh Bishnoi, AGA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI
Order
09/05/2025
[2025:RJ-JD:22626] (2 of 5) [SOSA-619/2025]
1. The instant applications for suspension of sentence have
been moved on behalf of the applicants in the matter of judgment
dated 21.03.2025 passed by the learned Special Judge, POCSO
Act Cases, Hanumangarh in Sessions Case No.72/2019 whereby
the applicants were convicted and sentenced and sentenced as
under:-
Name of the Offence for which Sentence, fine and default
accused convicted sentence
Sunil Singh Section 363 r.w. Section 3 years RI along with fine of
120-B of the IPC Rs.5,000/- and in default, one
month's RI
Section 366-A r.w. Section 5 years RI along with fine of
120-B of the IPC Rs.10,000/- and in default, two
months RI
Section 5(l)/6 of the POCSO 20 years RI along with fine of
Act Rs.20,000/- and in default,
three months RI
Gagandeep Section 363 r.w. Section 3 years RI along with fine of
Singh 120-B of the IPC Rs.5,000/- and in default, one
month's RI
Section 366-A r.w. Section 5 years RI along with fine of
120-B of the IPC Rs.10,000/- and in default, two
months RI
All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.
2. It is contended by the learned counsel for the appellants 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;
hearing of the appeals is likely to take long time, therefore, the
applications for suspension of sentence may be allowed.
3. Per contra, learned public prosecutor has vehemently
opposed the prayer made by learned counsel for the accused-
applicants for releasing the appellant on applications for
suspension of sentence.
[2025:RJ-JD:22626] (3 of 5) [SOSA-619/2025]
4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record
of the case, particularly the testimony of the victim recorded
during trial as PW-1 and during the course of investigation.
5. Even a cursory glance at the statement of victim lends
substantial support to the defence plea that the incident in
question appears to be a case of elopement. The defence version
carries weight, indicating that the victim had willingly joined the
company of the appellant, travelled with him to various locations,
used public transport, remained in public places amidst large
gatherings, and, at no point, made any effort to raise an alarm or
lodge a complaint regarding the matter.
6. Since the appeal has already been admitted and this Court is
yet to undertake a detailed appreciation of evidence to test the
sustainability of the conviction, no conclusive opinion is being
expressed at this stage. However, the aforementioned facts and
the material placed on record in support of the defence cannot be
overlooked.
7. The age of the victim also emerges as a seriously debatable
issue. The entries reflecting her age in various documents--
particularly Exhibits D-1 and D-2--differ from the age stated in
her school record. PW-2, Mangtu Singh, father of the victim,
appears to be an illiterate, who stated that the his daughter's date
of birth has been recorded in school record on a random idea.
Ex.P/14 the certificate of Secondary School is the only
corresponding entry in this regard.
8. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case and
perceiving strong arguable case in favour of the appellants and
looking to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case
[2025:RJ-JD:22626] (4 of 5) [SOSA-619/2025]
and not likelihood of hearing of appeals in near future, the
applications for suspension of sentence are accepted.
9. Accordingly, the applications for suspension of sentence filed
under Section 389 Cr.P.C. are 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-
applicants named above shall remain suspended till final disposal
of the aforesaid appeal and they shall be released on bail provided
each of them 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 11.06.2025
and whenever ordered to do so till the disposal of the appeal on
the conditions indicated below:-
1. That they will appear before the trial Court in the
month of January of every year till the appeal is decided.
2. That if the applicants changes the place of residence,
they will give in writing their 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.
10. 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-
applicants were 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:22626] (5 of 5) [SOSA-619/2025]
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
132-Mamta/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
