[2025:RJ-JP:18118] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 1878/2024 In S.B. Criminal Appeal No.355/2020 Hanuman Sahay Son Of Shri Nathuram, Aged About 60 Years, R/o Raigaro Ka Mohalla, Jhotwara Police Station Jhotwara Jaipur Raj. (At Present Accused Confined In Central Jail Jaipur) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Lakhan Singh Tomar with Ms. Pista Devi Darji For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vijay Singh Yadav, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN Order 29/04/2025 1. The instant application for suspension of sentence is preferred by appellant-Hanuman Sahay Son Of Shri Nathuram aggrieved from order of conviction and sentence dated 07.01.2020 in Sessions Case No.06/2019 passed by learned Special Judge (POCSO Act Cases) No.3, Jaipur Metro whereby appellant was convicted for offence under Sections 3/4, 11/12 of POCSO Act and 363 of IPC and sentenced accordingly. 2. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that appellant is a senior citizen and his current age is more than 65years. He further submitted that the appellant was falsely implicated at behest of complainant party. He also referred the allegations made [2025:RJ-JP:18118] (2 of 4) [SOSA-1878/2024] against the appellant and submitted that the victim was examined as PW-3 and the discrepancies were totally ignored by trial court. He also referred medical evidence and submitted that even the allegations were not corroborated from medical evidence. He further submitted that the purpose of false implication is to grab the house of appellant. He further referred judgment in case of Saudan Singh Vs. State of UP (SLP) Criminal Appeal No.308/2022 and submitted that the appellant has already undergone more than 7 years 2 months and 26 days as against sentence of 10 years awarded by the trial court. 3. Aforesaid contentions were opposed by learned Public Prosecutor. He submitted custody certificate along with intimation slip and same are taken on record. 4. Heard learned counsel for appellant and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the record. 5. In case of Saudan Singh Vs. State of UP (supra) Hon’ble Supreme Court has considered period of custody while releasing the accused on bail (SOS). In the instant case, the appellant is in custody since 24.03.2019 and period of incarceration is more than 7 years 2 months and 29 days. The first SOS application was dismissed on 12.05.2020. 6. On the basis of complaint filed by PW-1 uncle of victim (boy), FIR No.205/2019 was registered at P.S. Jhotwara, Jaipur under Sections 376, 377 IPC and 3/4 of POCSO Act. Police has filed charge-sheet against present appellant after investigation. After framing charge, prosecution has examined as many as 14 witnesses and exhibited 21 documents. The accused was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and he opted to submit [2025:RJ-JP:18118] (3 of 4) [SOSA-1878/2024] defence evidence but not submitted in defence. Learned trial court has convicted present appellant under Sections 363 IPC, 11/12 and 3/4 of POCSO Act alternatively Section 377 IPC. The trial court has convicted appellant and sentenced him to undergo 10 years of imprisonment under Section 3/4 of POCSO Act. 7. At the time of charge-sheet in 2019, the age of appellant was 60 years and now it is 65 years. The victim was examined as PW-3 and we have considered statement of PW-3. As per prosecution, date of birth of victim was 16.05.2005. The trial court has determined the age of victim as 13 years. We have also considered medical report and also FSL report along with statement of PW-14 Dr. Dwarka Prasad Mourya. 8. Having considered the fact that appellant is more than 65 years of age and he has already served more than 75 percent of the sentence, therefore without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, it is appropriate to release appellant on bail. 9. 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- Hanuman Sahay son of Shri Nathuram 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 08.08.2025 and whenever ordered to do so till the disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated below:- [2025:RJ-JP:18118] (4 of 4) [SOSA-1878/2024] 1. That the appellant accused shall not contact or connect directly or indirectly with victim or any of her family member. 2. 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. 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 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. 10. Misc. Application stands disposed of. 11. A copy of this order be sent to learned trial court through E- mail. (ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J PREETI VALECHA /09