[2026:RJ-JP:3502] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Misc. Suspension Of Sentence Application No. 2430/2024 In S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 3399/2024 Bane Singh S/o Ramswaroop, Aged About 37 Years, Resident Of Datiya, Police Station Kherali, District-Alwar (Raj). (At Present accused confined in Central Jail, Alwar) ----Accused appellant Versus State Of Rajashtan, Through Public Prosecutor. ----Respondent For appellant(s) : Mr. Kapil Gupta, Advocate Mr. Chitransh Saxena, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vijay Singh Yadav, Addl. G.A. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BHUWAN GOYAL Order 27/01/2026 1. This suspension of sentence application has been filed by the accused appellant under Section 430 BNSS against the judgment and order dated 22.5.2024 passed by Special Judge, Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, No.1, Alwar in Sessions Case No. 67/2023 (27/2023), whereby the accused appellant has been convicted for the offence under Sections 376(2)(f), 376(3) IPC and Section 5(n)/6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and sentenced as under: Offence Punishment Fine In default of Payment of fine [2026:RJ-JP:3502] (2 of 4) [SOSA-2430/2024] U/s. 5(n)/6 of POCSO Act: To undergo 20 years’ rigorous imprisonment Rs. 25,000/- 2 years’ simple imprisonment 2. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the accused appellant had lent Rs. 50,000/- to the complainant and when he asked to return the said money, in order to falsely implicate him, the FIR was lodged and that too, with one day delay. 3. He further submits that the alleged place of incident is the inner part of the house, where her all family members were present and the prosecutrix brother was also said to have been sleeping with her. Thus, it was not possible for the appellant to commit the alleged offence in the presence of the family members. He further submits that there are material contradictions in the statement of the prosecution witnesses and therefore, no reliance can be placed upon the testimony of prosecution witnesses. 4. He further submits that the prosecutrix hymen was found intact and she did not receive any injury on her private parts. The FSL report also does not corroborate the commission of offence with the prosecutix. Thus, it was established that no sexual intercourse took place with her. 6. He further submits that the accused appellant is in custody since 8.2.2023. The disposal of appeal is likely to take long time, therefore, the sentence awarded to the accused appellant be suspended during the pendency of the appeal. 7. Despite information, none has appeared on behalf of the complainant. [2026:RJ-JP:3502] (3 of 4) [SOSA-2430/2024] 8. Learned Addl. Government Advocate appearing for the State has opposed the same and submits that the accused appellant is the Mama of the prosecutrix. He further submits that in the school admission form (Ex.P/10A) as well as in the Scholar Register (Ex.P/11A) issued by officiating Principal, Government Sr. Secondary School, Laxmangarh, District Alwar, the prosecutrix date of birth 7.4.2010 was mentioned. The said date of birth has been duly corroborated from the oral evidence of PW-5 Ishar Prasad Meena, Vice Principal, Govt. Sr. Secondary School, Laxmangarh, District Alwar. Thus, it is well established that on the date of incident, the prosecutrix was aged about 12 years and 8 months minor girl. 9. He further submits that in her statement recorded under Section 164 CrPC (Ex. P/5) as well in her court statement recorded as PW-1, the prosecutrix levelled specific allegations against the accused appellant with regard to the offence committed by him. 10. Learned Addl. GA has further submitted that no document was produced before the trial court, from which it could be established that the accused appellant lent Rs. 50,000/- to the complainant. He further submits that as per statement of PW-6 Gaurav (brother of the prosecutrix), when he opened the eyes, he saw that after opening the gate, the accused appellant was running. He further submits that the trial court on the basis of material available on record has rightly convicted and sentenced the accused appellant, therefore, the sentence of the accused appellant should not be suspended. [2026:RJ-JP:3502] (4 of 4) [SOSA-2430/2024] 11. Heard learned counsel for the parties considered the material on record. 12. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the age of the prosecutrix, her statement recorded under Section 164 CrPC and her court statement recorded as PW- 1, but without going into the merits and demerits of the case, I do not deem it just and proper to suspend the sentence of the accused appellant. 13. Accordingly this suspension of sentence application filed by the appellant is dismissed. (BHUWAN GOYAL),J DK/25