HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Misc 2nd Suspension Of Sentence Application No. 1189/2025 in S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 1291/2024 Suraj Kushwah @ Rambabu @ Pachchis Son Of Tulsiram, Aged About 23 Years, Resident Of Santoshi Nagar, Kota, Police Station Mahaveer Nagar, Kota, District Kota City (Raj). At Present Resident Of Radheyshyam Sharma Ka Kiraye Ka Makaan, Bombay Yojna, R.k. Puram, Kota (Raj). ( At Present Accused Petitioner Confined In District Jail Baran). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vikas Bunkar For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rajendra Singh Shekhawat, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN Order 10/03/2026 1. This second suspension of sentence application is preferred by appellant-accused in criminal appeal admitted on 11.07.2024 and filed aggrieved from order of conviction and sentence dated 04.04.2024 in sessions case No. 21/2022 passed by learned Special Judge, POCSO Act Cases No.1, Baran wherein appellant- accused was convicted and sentenced under Section 363 IPC and 11/12 POCSO Act. 2. Learned counsel for the appellant while relying upon grounds of appeal submitted that without observing principle of law learned trial court has arrived at a conclusion of conviction. He further (2 of 5) [SOSA-1189/2025] submitted that learned trial court has overlooked material contradictions and discrepancies, which goes to root of the matter. He further submitted that the entire case of prosecution rests on testimony of interested witness and no independent witness was examined to corroborate the story of prosecution. 3. Learned counsel for appellant submits that maximum sentence awarded to appellant is three years whereas the appellant has undergone sentence of more than two years four months and ten days out of said sentence. He further undertakes that if appellant being released on bail, he will not indulge in direct or indirect contact with victim or her family members and if he indulged in contact then, bail may be recalled. 4. Aforesaid contentions were opposed by learned Public Prosecutor. He submitted that the complainant has already been informed. 5. Heard learned counsel for appellant and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the record. 6. First SOS application was dismissed by this Court on 06.08.2024 wherein we have noticed the fact that the statement of PW-1 was supported by her sister PW-5. The parents have also supported the case of victim. The maximum sentence awarded to present petitioner was three years. There was criminal antecedent report placed on record to show that 13 criminal cases were registered against the appellant. Herein also, after considering the entire material, there is no case on merits. 7. Now comes the period of custody and only on the ground of period of custody we are considering the instant SOS application. (3 of 5) [SOSA-1189/2025] 8. In Suo Moto Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 4/2021 in Re- policy Strategy for Grant of Bail on 08.05.2025, Hon’ble Supreme Court while considering judgments in case of Bhagwan Ram Shinde Gosai Vs. State of Gujarat (1999) 4 SCC 421, NCB Vs. Lakwinder Singh 2025 SCC Online SC 366 and Atul @ Ashutosh Vs. State of U.P. 2024 (3) SCC 663 has focused upon pro-active consideration of bail and SOS applications, where prisoners are in custody due to long detention or facing period of custody for fixed term sentence awarded to them. It was held that the approach of the Court must be liberal in cases, where a fixed term sentence is awarded. Herein, this case the appellant has served substantial part of sentence and the matter requires consideration. 9. At this stage, it is not possible for us to express any opinion on merits of the case, but looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, it is a fit case to enlarge appellant on bail. 10. Having taken note of the period of custody and also the grievance of the victim, it is appropriate to allow the SOS application subject to stringent conditions, therefore, without expressing any opinion on merits, I am of considered view that it is a fit case wherein appellant can be enlarged on bail. The application under Section 430(1) B.N.S.S. is allowed and sentence of appellant accused- Suraj Kushwah @ Rambabu @ Pachchis Son Of Tulsiram is suspended till disposal of appeal with the condition that he would 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 (4 of 5) [SOSA-1189/2025] court on 19.05.2026 and whenever ordered to do so till the disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated below:- 1. After release of appellant on bail, he will not indulge in any criminal activity and if it is found that he is involved in any criminal activity, the order shall be recalled. 2. The appellant accused after being released on bail will not contract directly or indirectly with victim or any of her family member till disposal of the appeal. 3. The appellant accused shall mark his attendance on first Monday of every third week in the month at concerned police station and report shall be sent to concerned Special Judge, POCSO Act cases. 4. That he will appear before the trial Court in the month of January of every year till the appeal is decided. 5. That if the applicant(s) 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. 6. Similarly, if the sureties change their address(s),they will give in writing their changed address to the trial Court. 7. In case, the applicant has violated any condition, then the order of SOS shall be recalled and cancelled. (5 of 5) [SOSA-1189/2025] 11. Misc. Application stands disposed of. 12. A copy of this order be sent to learned trial court through E- mail. (ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J Chetna/23