[2026:RJ-JP:983] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Misc 3rd Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 2352/2025 In S.B. Criminal Appeal No.3134/2024 Sahil Son Of Nisar, Aged About 21 Years, R/o Near Secondary Adarsh School, Village Jhilay, Police Station Niwai, District Tonk (Rajasthan) (At Present Confined In District Jail, Tonk) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through The Public Prosecutor ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. S.S. Hasan, Senior Advocate with Mr. Anas Khan, Mr. Ishan Raj Khan, Mr. Fahad Hasan and Mr. Aquif Khan For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vijay Singh Yadav, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN Order 09/01/2026 1. The 3rd application for suspension of sentence is preferred by appellant – Sahil S/o Nisar in pending appeal filed aggrieved from order of conviction and sentence dated 12.11.2024 in Sessions Case No.19/2024 passed by learned Special Judge, POCSO Act Cases, Tonk, whereby appellant was convicted for offence under Sections 341, 456, 509 of IPC and Sections 7/8 and 11/12 of POCSO Act and Section 67B of IT Act and sentenced accordingly. 2. Learned Senior Advocate for the appellant while relying upon grounds of appeal submitted that without observing principle of law learned trial court has arrived at a conclusion of conviction. He [2026:RJ-JP:983] (2 of 6) [SOSA-2352/2025] further submitted that learned trial court has overlooked material 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 Senior Advocate has submitted that 2nd SOS application of present appellant was dismissed on 27.05.2025 and since then the petitioner has already undergone a substantial part of awarded sentence. He also submits that till date, the appellant has served more than one year and 6 months sentence against the awarded sentence of 5 years. He further submits that the age of present appellant is 20 years and the age of victim is almost about the same. He further referred the statement of PW-5 (father of victim) and submitted that as per him, the Dob of victim is 02.09.2003. He further submitted that the Trial Court has determined the age of victim on the basis of DoB 02.09.2005. He also submitted that it is not possible to procure and capture the photographs as narrated by the prosecution. He further referred the material and submitted that present appellant was convicted for 5 years under the IT Act, but there is no offence of committing any rape or sexual assault with victim. 4. Aforesaid contentions were opposed by learned Public Prosecutor and he referred the evidence on record and conclusion drawn by the Trial Court and submitted that several obscene photographs and videos were recovered from the possession of present appellant, which is sufficient to show that the victim was threatened and terrorized. [2026:RJ-JP:983] (3 of 6) [SOSA-2352/2025] 5. Heard learned Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of appellant and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material placed on record. 6. On 27.05.2025, we have considered the 2nd bail application of present appellant and while dismissing the same, we have observed as under:- 5. On basis of report Ex. P-5 submitted by victim PW-2 about sexual assault and capture of some nude photograph by appellant accused, FIR No.464/2023 was registered at Police Station Niwai, District Tonk on 02.10.2023 and after investigation, a charge-sheet has been filed against the appellant accused. After framing the charge, the prosecution has examined 12 witnesses and exhibited 31 documents. The accused was examined under Section 313 CrPC and he has not submitted any defence evidence but exhibited one document Ex.D-1. The trial Court has convicted and sentenced the appellant accused. 6. The age of victim was determined by the trial Court on basis of evidence on record and also considering Section 94 of JJ Act. The trial Court has observed that the victim was less than of 18 years of age. The date of birth was proved as 02.09.2005. The evidence indicate that the parents of victim were married in 2001 and after 2 and half years, first child was born and thereafter two years later this victim was born and it comes to 2005. Any objection about the determination of age can be considered at the time of final adjudication but when a victim is less than 18 years of age then the POCSO Act is attracted. [2026:RJ-JP:983] (4 of 6) [SOSA-2352/2025] 7. The victim in her evidence has clearly stated sexual assault by the appellant accused. Moreover, some photographs were also exhibited by prosecution. An FSL Report Ex. P-31 and Ex.P-30 are also available on record. 8. Having considered the evidence of victim PW- 2, PW-3 Amarchand Chand (H.C.), PW-6 Shankar Lal, PW-10 Rajesh, PW-11 Haripal Singh (I.O.), I am of considered view that the matter pertains to sexual assault with a minor victim and also capturing of her indecent photographs and using them to ruin her life therefore, it is not a fit case wherein indulgence of bail can be granted to the appellant accused. 7. As regard to age of victim is concerned the evidence on record is about the DoB as 02.09.2005 and on basis of marriage of parents of victim, the age was determined by the Trial Court and the victim was less than 18 years. Any discrepancy as pointed out by learned Senior Advocate can only be considered at the time of final adjudication and not at this stage. 8. As regards to present case is concerned, the evidence on record clearly suggests that present appellant has captured the obscene videos and photographs of victim and same were examined by FSL. The Trial Court has also considered capturing and recording of these videos/photographs. 9. The maximum sentence awarded to present appellant is five years and he has served more than 1 years and 6 months. Learned Senior Advocate undertake that same stringent conditions can be imposed upon the present appellant and considering the suggestion and also the material on record and also over the [2026:RJ-JP:983] (5 of 6) [SOSA-2352/2025] circumstances, it is appropriate to consider the release of present appellant after allowing SOS application. 10. In view of discussion made hereinabove, the 3rd suspension of sentence application is hereby allowed and it is ordered that sentence of applicant-accused Sahil S/o Nasir is suspended till disposal of appeal with the condition that he would execute a personal bond in the sum of ₹50,000/- with two sureties of ₹25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for his appearance in this Court on 17.03.2026 and whenever ordered to do so till the disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated below:- 1. That the appellant accused shall not contact or connect directly or indirectly with victim or any of her family member. 2. That the appellant accused shall not indulge in any criminal activity and not repeat crime of any nature during period of suspension of sentence/bail. 3. The appellant shall mark his attendance on 2nd and 4th Wednesday of every month in the concerned Police Station Niwai (Tonk). 4. That the appellant will appear before the Trial Court in the month of January of every year till the appeal is decided. 5. That the appellant will not use any social media platform directly or indirectly for three years in any manner. [2026:RJ-JP:983] (6 of 6) [SOSA-2352/2025] 6. That if the appellant 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. 7. Similarly, if the sureties change their address(s), they will give in writing their changed address to the trial Court. 11. In case, the applicant has violated any condition then the order of suspension of sentence shall be recalled and cancelled. 12. Misc. Application stands disposed of. 13. A copy of this order be sent to learned trial court through E- mail. (ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J GAURAV /30