[2025:RJ-JP:5952] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Misc. Second Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 167/2025 In S.B. Criminal Appeal No.2252/2022 Sohan Lal S/o Shri Ram Lal, Aged About 20 Years, R/o Bambori, Police Station Diggi, Distt. Tonk Rajasthan (At Present Confined At District Jail, Tonk) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through The Public Prosecutor ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. S.S. Hasan, Sr, Adv. with Mr. Fahad Hasan For Respondent(s) : Ms. Arti Sharma, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 11/02/2025 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant-appellant and learned Public Prosecutor on the second application for suspension of sentence. 2. The applicant-appellant herein has been convicted for offences under Sections 363, 366A & 344 of IPC and Section 3/4(2) of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 vide judgment dated 20.09.2022 passed by learned Special Judge, Special Court, Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, Tonk (Raj.) in Sessions Case No.59/2021 (CIS No.59/2021) and has been sentenced to maximum punishment of 20 years. [2025:RJ-JP:5952] (2 of 3) [SOSA-167/2025] 3. Learned counsel for the appellant-applicant submit that first application for execution of sentence was considered on 25.07.2024 and same was dismissed as withdrawn. Counsel submits that thereafter, more than seven months have passed but appeal has not been placed for hearing. Thus, this second application for suspension of execution of sentence has been preferred on behalf of appellant-applicant. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant-appellant submits that learned trial court has erred in convicting and sentencing the applicant as mentioned above. Learned trial court has not appreciated the evidence in right and correct perspective. It is submitted that there is no medical corroboration of the allegation levelled by victim as no male DNA of appellant was found in vaginal swab, vaginal smear and undergarments of the victim. Counsel submits that it also appears from the testimony of parents of the victim that at the time of alleged incident, victim was 18 years of age. Counsel submits that appellant has been implicated solely on the basis of the fact that appellant is uncle of the co-accused with whom victim was having affair and co- accused and victim stayed for some time in the house of the appellant where appellant was residing with his family. Counsel submits that appellant has served incarceration of about four years and there is no immediate prospect of this appeal being heard and disposed of in near future. 5. Learned State counsel opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for applicant-appellant. She submits that there is no material change in circumstances after dismissal of first [2025:RJ-JP:5952] (3 of 3) [SOSA-167/2025] application for suspension of execution of sentence. She submits that there is allegation against the appellant that he committed rape upon the victim and it is a case of gang-rape. 6. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the present case and considering the evidence available on record, especially the fact that there is allegation against the appellant as well as co-accused of commission of rape upon the victim who has been found below 18 years of age at the time of alleged incident by the learned trial Court, thus, I am not inclined to suspend the second application for suspension of execution of sentence. 7. Accordingly, instant second application for suspension of execution of sentence is dismissed. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN), J LALIT MOHAN /40