[2026:RJ-JP:2639] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Misc 3rd Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 2627/2025 in S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 1374/2023 Prahalad S/o Badri Lal, Resident Of- Sangawada Police Station Sadar District Bundi (Raj.) Present Address Prem Narayan Malav Ka Bada, Gram Bhawanipura, Police Station Keshavaripatan, Bundi (Raj.) (At Present Accused Appellant Confined In District Jail Bundi) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajveer Singh Jhala for Mr. Rajendra Singh Tanwar For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vijay Singh Yadav, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN Order 20/01/2026 1. Instant third suspension of sentence application is preferred by appellant-accused in pending appeal admitted on 01.06.2023 and filed against judgment of conviction and sentence dated 05.05.2023 in sessions case (CIS) No. 100/2022 passed by learned special Judge (POCSO Act Cases) No.1, Bundi. 2. Learned counsel 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 further submitted that learned trial court has overlooked material contradictions and discrepancies, which goes to root of the matter. [2026:RJ-JP:2639] (2 of 3) [SOSA-2627/2025] 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 is in custody for last more than 4 year and 2 months. He also submitted that the maximum sentence awarded to present petitioner is 10 years, so he is entitled to be released on bail. He also submitted that the trial court has ignored the material discrepancies and contradictions. 4. Aforesaid contentions were opposed by learned Public Prosecutor. He submitted custody certificate and same is taken on record. 5. Heard learned counsel for appellant and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the record. 6. First application of suspension of sentence was considered by this Court on 18.08.2023 and same was dismissed. While considering the application we have observed as under:- Present appellant was not enlarged on bail during trial and he remained in custody. The age of victim is 7 years, we have considered the statement of victim PW2 and also her brother PW3 aged 11 years. Having considered that there was no injury on persona of victim but the fact is that victim straightaway alleged that appellant opened her cloths and after removing his cloths he lied down over her. PW4 mother of victim was also examined before the court and at last she admitted that after this incident Prahlad was caught and he fled but when he refused to compensate so a case was registered. We have considered entirety of facts and circumstances including statement of victim recorded before the court though it is not case of actual penetration or rape rather it is sexual assault but the age of victim is less than 12 years. Therefore, without expressing any opinion on merits, [2026:RJ-JP:2639] (3 of 3) [SOSA-2627/2025] I am of considered view that it is not a fit case wherein appellant can be enlarged on bail. The application under Section 389(1) Cr.P.C. is liable to be dismissed. 7. The period of custody till date is 4 years 1 months and 26 days against maximum awarded sentence of 10 years. The age of victim is less than 7 years, thus it is not a fit case to enlarge applicant-accused on bail. 8. Hence, S.B. Criminal 3rd Misc Suspension of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 2627/2025 preferred by Prahalad S/o Badri Lal is hereby dismissed. (ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J MONU /25