[2025:RJ-JP:5436] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Misc 2nd Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 1338/2024 In S.B. Criminal Appeal No.1275/2022 Vikram Prajapat S/o Shri Prahalad, Aged About 27 Years, Resident Of Kumhar Mohalla, Aluda Police Station Nangal Rajawatan District Dausa Rajasthan (At Present Confined In District Jail, Dausa Rajasthan) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Tarun Mishra For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vijay Singh Yadav, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN Order 06/02/2025 1. The instant application for suspension of sentence is preferred in pending appeal which was admitted on 10.03.2023 and aggrieved from order of conviction and sentence dated 30.06.2022 in Sessions Case No. 02/2020 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Dausa whereby appellant was convicted for offence under Sections 457 and 376 IPC and sentenced accordingly. 2. Learned counsel for appellant submitted that appellant is an innocent person and he was falsely implicated by complainant prosecutrix for animosity. He further submitted that out of total punishment of 10 years, appellant has already undergone 4 years 5 months and 20 days. He further submitted that the age of appellant is 25 years whereas victim is 70 years old and it is [2025:RJ-JP:5436] (2 of 4) [SOSA-1338/2024] improbable that a young boy like present appellant will commit rape with lust with such an old aged senior citizen. He further submitted that there is no medical corroboration of rape but learned trial court just relying upon examination-in-chief of victim has convicted present appellant. He further submitted that learned trial court has ignored discrepancies and material contradictions in the statement of victim PW-1. He further submitted that in near future there is no likelihood of hearing of appeal and appellant has strong grounds to succeed in appeal. 3. Aforesaid contentions were opposed by learned Public Prosecutor. 4. Heard learned counsel for appellant and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the record. 5. On the basis of written report dated 21.09.2019 for alleged incident of rape committed on 20.09.2019 by son of Prahlad, FIR No.242/2019 was registered at P.S. Nangal Rajawatan, Dausa under Sections 376 and 457 IPC. After investigation, charge-sheet has been filed and appellant accused has faced trial for offence under Sections 457 and 376 IPC. The victim was examined as PW- 1. Learned Additional Sessions Judge Dausa after considering the evidence has convicted present appellant under Sections 376 and 457 IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment of 10 years and 5 years respectively. 6. The first SOS application of appellant was dismissed by this Court on 03.07.2023. We have noticed that present appellant was released on bail on 20.01.2021 in S.B. Criminal Second Misc. Bail Application No.656/2021. The appellant remained on bail during trial but after conviction he was taken in custody and since then [2025:RJ-JP:5436] (3 of 4) [SOSA-1338/2024] he is in custody. As per latest custody certificate, appellant has already undergone 4 years 5 months and 20 days out of maximum award of 10 years under Section 376 IPC. 7. Admittedly the age of victim is 70 years and FIR was registered against unnamed person but after identification parade, the victim has identified present appellant and accordingly, charge-sheet was filed against him. 8. After considering the arguments on merits of SOS application, we have dismissed first SOS application on 03.07.2023 and since then around 20 months have been elapsed and after few months the period of incarceration would be 50 percent of the total sentence. 9. In case of Atul @ Ashutosh vs State Of Madhya Pradesh CRIMINAL APPEAL No.579 of 2024, Hon’ble Supreme Court has emphasized the need to suspend sentence and grant of bail in case where an appeal challenging the conviction is unlikely to be heard before completion of entire sentence. In case of fixed term sentence particularly when the appeal process is prolonged, the sentence should be suspended and bail be granted. 10. Having considered the entirety of facts and circumstances of the case, we cannot opine on merits of the case but looking to the facts and circumstances of the case that out of 10 years sentence, the appellant has almost undergone 45 percent of the sentence and likely to complete 50 percent, therefore instead of keeping this SOS application pending, it is appropriate to allow SOS application. 11. Therefore, without expressing any opinion on merits, I am of considered view that it is a fit case wherein appellant can be [2025:RJ-JP:5436] (4 of 4) [SOSA-1338/2024] enlarged on bail. The application under Section 430(1) B.N.S.S. is allowed and sentence of appellant accused-Vikram Prajapat S/o Shri Prahalad, 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 court on 19.05.2025 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. That he will appear before the trial Court in the month of January of every year till the appeal is decided. 3. 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. 4. Similarly, if the sureties change their address, they will give in writing their changed address to the trial Court. 12. Misc. Application stands disposed of. 13. A copy of this order be sent to learned trial court through E- mail. (ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J PREETI VALECHA /01