Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Sunil vs State Of Rajasthan on 6 November, 2025
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Appeal (Sb) No. 2467/2025
Sunil S/o Rambaksh, Aged About 20 Years, Resident Of Khatik
Mohalla, Gulabpura, District Bhilwara, Rajasthan
(At Present Lodge In District Jail Bhilwara)
----Appellant
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor
2. Raghuveer Garg S/o Gopal Garg, Aged About 36 Years,
R/o Pratap Nagar Colony, Gulabpura, District
Bhilwara,Rajasthan
----Respondents
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Yashraj Singh Kanawat
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shri Ram Choudhary, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP SHAH
Order
06/11/2025
IN S.B. Criminal Appeal (SB) No. 2467/2025:-
1. Admit.
2. Call for record.
3. Learned Public Prosecutor is directed to ensure that the
parents/guardians of the child are informed with regard to filing of
the present application as well as for suspension of sentence.
4. Let information be sent immediately through the SHO
concerned, returnable within a period of four weeks.
IN S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application for Suspension of
Sentence No.1984/2025:-
1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant-applicant as well as
learned Public Prosecutor and perused the material available on
record.
(Uploaded on 06/11/2025 at 02:16:22 PM)
(2 of 4) [CRLAS-2467/2025]
2. Learned counsel for the appellant-applicant submits that the
trial Court itself has specified that no offence under Section 376
IPC or under Sections 3/4 and 5/6 of POCSO Act is made out. He
further asserts that as per the version of the prosecution itself, the
prosecutrix went along with the appellant and therefore, none of
the ingredients under Section 363 IPC is made out. He further
asserts that the punishment imposed is three years' rigorous
imprisonment and the hearing of the appeal will take sufficient
time. He further submits that the appellant has already remained
under custody for a period of 1 year and 5 months out of total
period of 3 years. He, therefore, implores this Court to allow the
present application for suspension of sentence.
3. Per contra, the learned Public Prosecutor opposes the
application for suspension of sentence and submits that the
learned Trial Court after considering the entire evidence while
acquitting the appellant for offence under Section 376 IPC as well
as offences under Sections 3/4 and 5/6 of POCSO Act, has rightly
convicted for offence under Section 363 IPC, and therefore, the
accused-appellant is not entitled for any indulgence whatsoever.
4. Upon consideration of the arguments advanced on behalf of
the parties and having regard to the facts and circumstances of
the case, including the facts that there are arguable points raised
by learned counsel for the appellant-applicant with regard to
absence of necessary ingredients for offence under Section 363,
the appellant-applicant is behind the bars since 1 year and 5
months as against the total punishment of 3 years and the
chances of hearing of appeal in near further being bleak, this
(Uploaded on 06/11/2025 at 02:16:22 PM)
(3 of 4) [CRLAS-2467/2025]
Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case for suspending the
sentence awarded to the accused-appellant.
5. Accordingly, the application for suspension of sentence filed
under Section 389 of Cr.P.C./ Section 430 of BNSS, 2023 is
allowed and it is ordered that the sentence passed by the learned
Special Court, Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act,
2012 and Commission for Protection of Child Rights Act, 2005,
Serial No.1, Bhilwara, vide judgment dated 09.10.2025 in
Sessions Case No. 67/2024 against the applicant Sunil S/o
Rambaksh 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.2,00,000/- with two
sureties of Rs.1,00,000/-, each to the satisfaction of the learned
trial Judge for his appearance in this court on 08.12.2025 and
whenever ordered to do so till the disposal of the appeal on the
conditions indicated below:-
1. That he/she/they will appear before the trial
Court in the month of January of every year till the
appeal is decided.
2. That if the applicant(s) changes the place of
residence, he/she/they will give in writing
his/her/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.
6. The learned trial Court shall keep the record of attendance of
the accused-applicant(s) in a separate file. Such file be registered
as Criminal Misc. Case related to original case in which the
accused-applicant(s) was/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
(Uploaded on 06/11/2025 at 02:16:22 PM)
(4 of 4) [CRLAS-2467/2025]
relating to pendency and disposal of cases in the trial court. In
case the said accused-applicant(s) does/do not appear before the
trial Court, the learned trial Judge shall report the matter to the
High Court for cancellation of bail.
(SANDEEP SHAH),J
1-charul/-
(Uploaded on 06/11/2025 at 02:16:22 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
