HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 1027/2024 in S.B. Criminal Appeal No.1260/2024 Lokesh @ Chetram S/o Sheoji Lal, Aged About 26 Years, R/o Dodi Police Station Dei District Bundi (Raj). (At Present Confined In Jail Bundi). ----Appellant Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Public Prosecutor. ----Respondent For Appellant(s) : Mr.Hakam Ali For Respondent(s) : Mr.Rajesh Choudhary, GA-cum-AAG Mr.Amit Punia, Addl.GA-cum-PP JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 07/10/2025 1. Learned counsel for the appellant was charge-sheeted for the offence punishable under Section 363, 366, 376(3) of IPC and Section 5(i)(ii) and 6 of POCSO Act. Counsel submits that during the course of trial, the statements of the prosecutrix PW-1 and her parents PW-2 and PW-3 were recorded and they have not supported the case of the prosecution, hence, they were declared as hostile. Counsel submits that in spite of the above and that there is no incriminating evidence against the appellant, he has been held guilty for the above stated offences only on the basis of the DNA report. Counsel submits that a conviction of an accused cannot be recorded simply on the basis of the DNA evidence and (2 of 3) [SOSA-1027/2024] the same has been held by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Rahul Vs. State of Delhi reported in (2023) 1 SCC 83. Counsel submits that the appellant is in custody and the disposal of the appeal is bound to take time, therefore, the sentence of the appellant be suspended till final disposal of the appeal. 2. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the suspension of sentence application. 3. Heard and considered the submissions made at the Bar and perused the material available on record. 4. Considering the arguments put forward by learned counsel for the appellant and looking to the fact that neither the prosecutrix nor her parents have supported the version of the prosecution, hence, they have been declared as hostile, it is apparent that the appellant has been convicted solely on the basis of the DNA evidence. 5. Looking to the fact that the appellant is in custody and the disposal of the instant appeal is likely to take time, this Court deems it just and proper to suspend the sentence awarded to the accused-appellant. 6. Accordingly, the application for suspension of sentence filed by the applicant under Section 389 Cr.P.C. is allowed and the sentence awarded by the Trial Court against the appellant Lokesh @ Chetram S/o Sheoji Lal shall remain suspended till final disposal of the aforesaid appeal and subject to the condition that the appellant shall deposit the fine amount as imposed by the Trial Court and thereafter, he shall be released on bail provided he executes a personal bond for the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties of Rs.50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial (3 of 3) [SOSA-1027/2024] Judge for his appearance before this Court on 10.11.2025 and whenever ordered to do so till the disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated below:- 1. That he shall appear before the Trial Court in the month of January of every year till the appeal is decided. 2. That if the appellant changes his 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. 3. Similarly, if the sureties change their address(s), they will give in writing their changed address to the Trial Court. 4. Appellant shall deposit the fine amount as imposed by the learned Trial Court. 5. In case the appellant is found involved in committing and repeating the same offence again, the State/complainant would be at liberty to move application for cancellation of bail. 7. The learned Trial Court shall maintain the record of attendance of the accused-appellant in a separate file. Such file be registered as Criminal Misc. Case relating to original case in which the accused-appellant was tried and convicted. A copy of this order shall also be placed in that file for ready reference. Criminal Misc. Case file shall not be taken into account for statistical purpose relating to pendency and disposal of cases in the trial court. 8. In case the accused-appellant does not appear before the trial court, the learned Trial Judge shall report the matter to the High Court for cancellation of bail. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Aayush Sharma /71