[2026:RJ-JP:2632] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Misc 3rd Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 1084/2025 in S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 1592/2022 Ramesh @ Bunty S/o Shri Munshi Ram, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Village Siliserh Police Station Alwar, District Al- war. Presently Residing As Tenant At Ashok Harijan Ka Makaan, Near Rajiv Nagar Park, Police Station Sadar, Jaipur West (Accused In Central Jail, Jaipur) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajneesh Gupta For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vijay Singh Yadav, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN Order 20/01/2026 1. The instant 3rd application for suspension of sentence is preferred in pending appeal which was admitted on 26.08.2022 and aggrieved from order of conviction and sentence dated 01.08.2022 in Sessions Case No. 29/2021 (169/2020) passed by learned Special Judge (POCSO Act Cases) No.2, Jaipur Metro-II whereby appellant was convicted for offence under Sections 376(AB)/511 IPC and Section 5(m)/6/18 of POCSO Act and sen- tenced accordingly. 2. Learned counsel for the appellant while relying upon grounds of appeal submitted that without observing principle of [2026:RJ-JP:2632] (2 of 3) [SOSA-1084/2025] law learned trial court has arrived at a conclusion of conviction. He further submitted that learned trial court has overlooked ma- terial contradictions and discrepancies, which goes to root of the matter. He further submitted that the entire case of prosecution rests on testimony of interested witness and no independent witness was examined to corroborate the story of prosecution. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that the petitioner has prayed for disposal of criminal appeal but same was not dis- posed of till date. He also submits that the petitioner has several grounds to succeed in the appeal and till date due to non-con- sideration of appeal, the petitioner has to remain in custody. He also submits that the appeal may be considered at earliest. 4. Aforesaid contentions were opposed by learned Public Pros- ecutor. He submitted custody certificate and report received from concerned Police station and same are taken on record. 5. Heard learned counsel for appellant and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the record. 6. After conviction of appellant-accused on 01.08.2022, a criminal appeal is filed in 2022 and same is pending for consid- eration before this Court. The petitioner has undergone 3 years 9 months and 3 days out of awarded sentence of 10 years. While considering first application of suspension of sentence on 20.07.2023, this Court has observed as under:- A perusal of record indicated that appellant was re- leased on bail during trial in pursuance of order dated 08.02.2021 in S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 1356/2021 and thereafter, the appellant remained on bail. Having considered the evidence as referred by learned counsel for appellant, the fact of the matter is that victim was less than 10 years of age on date of incident [2026:RJ-JP:2632] (3 of 3) [SOSA-1084/2025] and she is a refugee (resident of Myanmar). The victim was examined as PW-1 before learned trial court and her deposition in examination-in-chief clearly indicated that present appellant had committed rape after removing the clothes of victim. This fact was further verified from the deposition of two minor witnesses i.e. PW-16 and PW-17. Having considered the statement of PW-3 (Dr. Sonu), PW- 10 (Dr. Renu Khandelwal) and Ex.P-4 (Medical Report) though there were no injuries on body of victim but before actual penetrative sexual assault, the victim was rescued. Since it is a case of minor who is less than 10 years old, which is a grave and heinous act and in such cases, this court does not find any reason to enlarge the appellant on bail. 7. The second application for suspension of sentence was dis- missed by this Court on 31.05.2024. The petitioner has ap- proached Hon’ble Supreme Court by filing SLP (Criminal) Appeal No. 34865/2024 and same was dismissed on 09.09.2024. 8. Having taken note of the fact that the victim is 8 years old girl and the evidence indicate grievous charge upon the petitioner. 9. Considering the gravity of the charge and the age of victim, it is not a fit case to enlarge applicant on bail. Hence, S.B. Crimi- nal 3rd Misc Suspension of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 1084/2025 preferred by Ramesh @ Bunty S/o Shri Munshi Ram is hereby dismissed. (ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J MONU /23