[2025:RJ-JP:26746] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 2304/2024 In S.B. Criminal Appeal No.3266/2024 Sanjay Kumar S/o Ramesh, Resident Of Jadla Police Station Lakheri District Bundi At Present Kankra Doongar Police Station Lakheri Dsitrict Bundi (Raj) (At Present Confined In District Jail Bundi (Raj) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Praveen Kumar Jain For Respondent(s) : Mr. Devi Singh, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN Order 12/07/2025 1. The instant application for suspension of sentence is preferred by appellant - Sanjay Kumar S/o Ramesh in pending appeal filed aggrieved from order of conviction and sentence dated 26.11.2024 in Sessions Case No.131/2023 passed by learned Special Judge (POCSO Act Cases) No.1, Bundi whereby appellant was convicted for offence under Sections 363, 366, 376(2)(n) of IPC and Section 5(l)/6 of POCSO Act and sentenced accordingly. 2. Learned counsel for the appellant while relying upon grounds of appeal submitted that report Ex.P-1 was registered merely on suspicion under Section 363 IPC wherein also no specific allegation is made against the appellant. He further submitted that [2025:RJ-JP:26746] (2 of 5) [SOSA-2304/2024] after recovery of victim, her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. was recorded and exhibited as Ex.P-14 wherein victim has specifically stated that she has voluntarily left her house and solemnized marriage with appellant. He further submitted that merely on the basis of statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. the appellant was granted bail by this Hon’ble Court. He further referred the evidence of PW-2 (mother of victim) and PW-6 (Chandrakala) and further referred Ex.P-18 and submitted that there is a cutting in the record, which is further evident from deposition of PW-15 (Roop Narayan) and Ex.P-26 to Ex.P-28 thus the age of victim is between 18 to 19 years and she was major (adult) on date of incident. He further submitted that the trial court has ignored the evidence available on record to draw a conclusion about evidence of PW-3 (Chandrakala), who is an Anganwadi worker and PW-15 (Roop Narayan), a school teacher. He also referred evidence of PW-9 Dr. Mobin and submitted that nothing abnormal was found in medical and there was no injury on body of victim. He further referred cross-examination of PW-3 victim and submitted that this is a case of consent and volunteered act of victim and no use of force was proved. At last, he submitted that the marriage was not solemnized due to caste difference and the appellant is a student and disposal of appeal will take its own time. 3. Aforesaid contentions were opposed by learned Public Prosecutor. He submitted custody certificate along with intimation slip to complainant and same are taken on record. 4. Heard learned counsel for appellant and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the record. [2025:RJ-JP:26746] (3 of 5) [SOSA-2304/2024] 5. On the basis of report, Ex.P-1 filed by PW-1 father of victim about elopement of his daughter on enticement by appellant, FIR No. 169/2023 at P.S. Lakheri, Dist. Bundi was registered. After recovery of victim, her statement was recorded and after medical and other investigation, a charge-sheet has been filed against the appellant. After investigation, police has filed charge-sheet against appellant. After framing charge, prosecution has examined 16 witnesses and exhibited 33 documents. The court has examined one document Ex.C1. The accused was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. but he has not submitted any defence evidence though exhibited 3 documents. The appellant was released on bail in pursuant to order dated 21.03.2024 in bail application No.1962/2024 by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court observing that as per date of birth the victim is about 16 years and in her statement, she has admitted to be 20 years whereas appellant is of 23 years. The appellant has served nearly one year one month and 25 days against the awarded sentence. 6. Initially report was registered under Section 363 IPC but after her recovery on 11.10.2023 the statement was recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. (Ex.P-14) and she stated that she has called appellant to her home and then at railway station where she went on her own. The victim has further stated that she has asked Sanjay for elopement and then both of them went to temple of Goddess where they solemnized marriage. She has stated about voluntarily establishing physical relation with accused. The medical of victim was conducted on 12.10.2023 and no injuries were found on her genital. The trial court has determined the age of victim as 16 years 2 months 2 days on the basis of date of birth as [2025:RJ-JP:26746] (4 of 5) [SOSA-2304/2024] 24.06.2007 after considering Section 94 of JJ Act. Learned counsel for appellant has referred statements of PW-2, PW-6, PW-15 along with record Ex.P18, P26 to P28. Since, victim is minor, so her consent is immaterial, but her age is above 16 years. 7. At this stage, it is not possible for us to express any opinion on merits of the case, but these grounds can be raised at the time of final adjudication. The age of victim is between 16 to 18 years, and she was examined as PW-3 before the trial court and we have considered her statement including cross-examination. We have considered other documents. Thus, considering the totality of facts and circumstances of the case, it is a fit case to enlarge appellant on bail. 8. 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- Sanjay Kumar S/o Ramesh 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 04.11.2025 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. [2025:RJ-JP:26746] (5 of 5) [SOSA-2304/2024] 2. That the appellant accused shall not contact or connect directly or indirectly with victim or any of her family member. 3. That he will appear before the trial Court in the month of January of every year till the appeal is decided. 4. 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. 5. Similarly, if the sureties change their address(s),they will give in writing their changed address to the trial Court. 6. In case, the applicant has violated any condition, then the order of SOS shall be recalled and cancelled. 9. Misc. Application stands disposed of. 10. A copy of this order be sent to learned trial court through E- mail. (ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J PREETI VALECHA /62