HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal) No.738/2024 In S.B. Criminal Appeal No.3377/2023 Jagdish Bheel S/o Shri Mahadev, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Kishanganj, Police Station Budhadeet, District Kota(Raj.) (At Present Accused Confined In District Jail, Kota) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. D.N. Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Amit Gupta, Dy. GA-cum-PP JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 06/10/2025 1. The instant suspension of sentence application has been filed against the judgment dated 05.08.2023 passed by the Special Court, Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act No.3, Kota in Special Session Case No.28/2023 by which the appellant has been convicted and sentenced under Section 376(3) IPC and 3/4 (2) POCSO Act. 2. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that identity of the victim is disputed in FIR. Learned counsel submits that the father’s name of the victim was mentioned in FIR as Babu Lal while no documentary evidence has been produced on the record that she is daughter of Babu Lal and in fact she is the daughter of Ram Swaroop, as this fact has been recorded in her educational record (2 of 2) [SOSA-738/2024] but subsequently the name Ram Swaroop @ Babu Lal has been incorporated when statement of the victim was recorded during the course of the trial. Learned counsel submits that, under these circumstances, the entire case of the prosecution becomes doubtful. 3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposes the prayer and submits that the age of the victim was 12 years on the date of incident and as per the allegations levelled by the victim against the appellant, rape was committed with her by him and the DNA Profile of Exhibit-7, i.e., blood sample of the victim on FTA Card was found to be matched with the DNA Profile of the underwear of the accused, i.e., Exhibit-5, hence the allegation of rape against the appellant is corroborated by the scientific evidence. Learned counsel submits that no evidence has been produced on the record about the false implication of the appellant by the victim, who is 12 years of the age, hence the sentence awarded to the appellant be not suspended. 4. Heard and considered the submissions made at the Bar and perused the material available on the record. 5. Considering the arguments put forward by learned Public Prosecutor and looking to the serious nature of allegations as levelled against the appellant and also looking to the age of the victim and DNA Profile, which is matching, this Court does not deem it just and proper to suspend the sentence of the appellant as awarded by the trial court. 6. Accordingly, the sentence of suspension application stands dismissed. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Karan/66