HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Criminal Misc 3rd Suspension Of Sentence Application No. 14/2025 In D. B. Criminal Appeal No.295/2022 Manoj Saini Son Of Radhakishan Saini, Resident Of Mehtab Singh Ka Nohra, P.s. Kotwali Alwar (Raj) Presently Resident Of Vijay Nagar, Jail Chauraha Opp Dashhara Ground, Police Station Shivaji Park, Alwar (Raj) Presently At Naharpur, P.s. Udyog Nagar, Alwar (Raj) (Presently Accused Petitioner Confined At Central Jail, Alwar) ----Applicant Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P ----Respondent For Applicant(s) : Mr. Mahendra Shandilya, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Jitendra Singh Rathore, Addl.G.A. Mr. Aman Kumar, AAAG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BHUWAN GOYAL Order 26/05/2025 1. Heard on 3rd application for suspension of sentence. 2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. He was on bail during trial. Sentence of co-accused have been suspended by this court. He further submits that prosecutrix was recovered on 04.10.2020. At that time, her statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. was recorded by the concerned Investigating Officer, in which, she had not levelled any allegation of rape against anyone. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that DNA sample was sent to the FSL after an inordinate delay. Independent witnesses, at whose place, the prosecutrix had stayed, did not support the prosecution story. He also submits that DNA report can not be a (2 of 2) [SOSA-14/2025] sole ground to reject the application for suspension of sentence. Hearing of appeal may take long time. So the suspension of sentence application filed by the applicant be allowed. 3. Learned Addl.G.A. has opposed the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the applicant and submitted that at the time of incident, age of the prosecutrix was 14 years and 3 months. In her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., she had levelled the allegation of rape against the applicant. Previous suspension of sentence application filed by the applicant was dismissed on merits on the basis that DNA profile of the applicant matched with the DNA profile of victim of this case. Thereafter, there is no change in the facts and circumstances of the case. So, third suspension of sentence application filed by the applicant be dismissed. 4. We have considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned Addl.G.A. 5. Looking to the age of the victim, her statement & DNA report, we are not inclined to entertain the third application for suspension of sentence. 6. Therefore, the 3rd suspension of sentence application filed by the applicant stands dismissed. (BHUWAN GOYAL),J (NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J Avinash-Gourav/13