[2025:RJ-JP:22801] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 948/2025 In S.B. Criminal Appeal No.1250/2025 Kamlesh Prajapat Alias Kamal S/o Shri Shri Lalchand, R/o Amri Ka Badiya Bajaj Nagar Lane No 3 Beawar P S Beawar City District Beawar Currently Resident Of Village Dosla Police Station Saket Nagar, District Beawar Currently Working At Panch Batti Chauraha Near Shivji Temple Dhawas Girdharipura Jaipur (Currently Confined At Central Jail Ajmer) ----Appellant Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P. ----Respondent For Appellant(s) : Mr. Sumit Khandelwal Mr. Sumit Kumar Soni Mr. Sunil Kumar Chechi Mr. Gajendra Singh Chauhan For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vijay Singh Yadav, PP with Mr. Gaurav Gupta, AGA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN Order 27/05/2025 1. The instant application for suspension of sentence is preferred by the appellant-applicant accused Kamlesh Prajapat Alias Kamal S/o Shri Shri Lalchand (hereinafter referred to ‘the appellant’) in pending appeal aggrieved from order of conviction and sentence dated 28.03.2025 in Sessions Case No.69/2024 passed by learned Special Judge, POCSO Act Cases, Ajmer whereby the appellant was convicted for offence under Sections 67B of IT Act and Section 13/14 of POCSO [2025:RJ-JP:22801] (2 of 4) [SOSA-948/2025] Act and further sentenced to undergo imprisonment of 5 years in each of offence with fine. 2. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant is an innocent person and he was falsely implicated by complainant. He further submits that the maximum sentence awarded to the appellant is 5 years and the appeal will take its own time. He also submits that there is no criminal antecedents against the appellant and the appellant has good chance to succeed in appeal. 3. Learned counsel has further submitted that on basis of report of mother of victim, police has investigated the matter and only on basis of IP address, the appellant accused was arrested and a charge-sheet was filed. He submits that nowhere it was established that the Instagram ID used in the matter was created or operated by the appellant. He also submits that there is serious flaw in the investigation as the police has not investigated about the ‘X’ account and no material is available on record where any inquiry was made from operator of social media Apps. At last, he submitted that the submission of victim is not trustworthy and she has made several improvements in her statement. 4. Aforesaid contentions were opposed by learned Public Prosecutor and he has submitted report received from PS Beawar Sadar along with intimation slip to complainant and custody certificate and same are taken on record. 5. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the record. 6. On basis of report Ex.P-4 lodged by PW-2 mother of victim about uploading indecent and nude photograph and video of her [2025:RJ-JP:22801] (3 of 4) [SOSA-948/2025] 17 years old daughter by unknown person, FIR No.456/2023 under Section 67B of IT Act was registered at PS Beawar Sadar and after investigation police has filed charge-sheet against the appellant accused. After framing the charge, the prosecution has examined 11 witnesses and exhibited 24 documents. The accused was examined under Section 313 CrPC and he has not submitted any defence evidence and exhibited one document. The trial Court has convicted and sentenced the appellant accused. 7. A perusal of fact clearly indicate that an ID missupapa 552 was created on Instagram from a mobile “Vivo Y-36” having IMEI Nos.867158065153718 & 867158065153700. After registration of report Ex. P-4, the matter was investigated by PW-10 Surya Bhan Singh and during interrogation, the mobile handset of appellant accused was seized and a memo Ex.P-11 was prepared. The police has sent a letter to procure Meta Data from Instagram App and reply was received as Ex.P-17 which indicated IP Address used to create and operate ID. This matter was further investigated by PW-11 Gangaram and IPDR was procured by him along with certificate and same was exhibited by him. This is a case of creating fake Instagram ID and uploading nude and indecent videos of victim to social media app to defame victim. 8. The important witnesses is victim who was examined as PW- 3 and her evidence suggested that this appellant accused was her friend and he forced PW-3 to share videos and also forced for video calling. Later these videos or recorded videos call were misused by accused. The evidence of PW-3 clearly named appellant and it also indicated that just to break her engagement this was done by the appellant. We have considered further [2025:RJ-JP:22801] (4 of 4) [SOSA-948/2025] statement of PW-2 mother of victim, PW-4 father of victim and PW-5 brother of victim. 9. Having considered the fact that the age of victim is less than 18 years and her obscene and indecent videos were uploaded on fake ID of Instagram. Therefore, it is a serious act with an object to defame victim. The object behind enactment of POCSO Act was not only to protect children from sexual assault and harassment but also to protect from exposing them to digital platform while publishing their indecent and obscene photograph/video(s). 10. This is a case wherein victim was shown in an indecent/obscene manner by the appellant accused and he not only misused the photograph / video of victim but also played a role in ruining the life of victim. The police has collected evidence by procuring Meta Data from Instagram and also procuring IPDR details, therefore, whatever be the flaw in the investigation, same can be considered at the stage of final adjudication. The facts are sufficient to dismiss the application for suspension of sentence of this appellant accused at early stage. 11. In view of discussion made hereinabove, I am of considered view that this is not a fit case wherein indulgence of bail can be granted to the presence appellant accused. 12. Hence, the instant suspension of sentence application filed by the appellant accused Kamlesh Prajapat @ Kamal is hereby dismissed. 13. List the appeal for hearing in the month of October, 2025. (ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J MR/20