SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(RAJ) 634

[2025:RJ-JD:9741]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal)
No. 1466/2024 Jitendra S/o Prahalad Ram, Aged About 26 Years, R/o Mundwa At Present Bhargava Mohalla, Nagaur Police Station Kotwali, Nagaur. (At Present Lodged In District Jail Nagaur.)
----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ravindra Acharya For Respondent(s) : Mr. Kuldeep Singh Kumpawat, Asst. to Mr. Deepak Choudhary, AAG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG

Suspension of sentence granted based on contradictions in the victim's statement and the appellant's prior bail status.

Headnote:(A) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 161 and Section 389 - Application for suspension of sentence - The appellant contended that the victim's statement indicated no rape occurred, citing contradictions and omissions - The court found it appropriate to suspend the sentence given the appellant was on bail during trial - Conditions for bail were stipulated. (Paras 2-5)

(B) Bail - The court emphasized the necessity of the accused's appearance before the trial court and the requirement to notify any change of residence. (Paras 5-6)

Facts of the case:
The appellant was convicted under the Prevention of Children from Sexual Offences Act, with the victim's statement raising doubts about the occurrence of the crime.

Findings of Court:
The court deemed it fit to suspend the sentence, allowing the appellant to remain on bail pending appeal.

Issues: The main issue was whether the contradictions in the victim's statement warranted suspension of the sentence.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the appellant's prior bail status and the nature of the victim's statement justified the suspension of the sentence.

Result: Application for suspension of sentence allowed.

ORDER :

(MANOJ KUMAR GARG, J.)

Heard learned counsel for the appellant as well as learned Assistant to Addl. Advocate General and perused the material available on record.

2. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that according to the statement of victim, recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., she clearly mentioned that appellant did not commit rape with her and she went alongwith the appellant at Ahmedabad and during this period she did not raise any hue and cry and there are major contradictions, improvements and omission in her statement. The appellant was on bail during the trial and hearing of the appeal will take sufficient long time. Therefore, the sentence may kindly be suspended. 

3. Learned Assistant to Addl. Advocate General opposed the prayer made by the counsel for the appellant.

4. Upon a consideration of the arguments advanced on behalf of the appellant and having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the appellant was on bail during the trial, therefore, this Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case for suspending the sentences awarded to the accused appellant.

5. Accordingly, the application for suspension of sentence filed under Section 389 Cr.P.C. (430 BNSS) is allowed and it is ordered that the sentence in the judgment dated 30.08.2024 passed by the learned Special Judge (Prevention of Children from Sexual Offence Act Cases, 2012) Nagaur, in Sessions Case No.47/2017 (100/2018) against the appellant-applicant Jitendra S/o Prahalad Ram, shall remain suspended till final disposal of the aforesaid appeal and he will be released on bail, provided he executes personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties of Rs.50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for his appearance in this court on 20.03.2025 and whenever ordered to do so till the disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated below:-

1. That he/she/they will appear before the trial Court in the month of January of every year till the appeal is decided.

2. That if the applicant(s) changes the place of residence, he/she/they will give in writing his/her/their changed address to the trial Court as well as to the counsel in the High Court.

3. Similarly, if the sureties change their address(s), they will give in writing their changed address to the trial Court.

6. The learned trial Court shall keep the record of attendance of the accused-applicant(s) in a separate file. Such file be registered as Criminal Misc. Case related to original case in which the accused- applicant(s) was/were tried and convicted. A copy of this order shall also be placed in that file for ready reference. Criminal Misc. file shall not be taken into account for statistical purpose relating to pendency and disposal of cases in the trial court. In case the said accused applicant(s) does not appear before the trial court, the learned trial Judge shall report the matter to the High Court for cancellation of bail. 

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top