The court may suspend a sentence if the accused has served a significant portion of the sentence and the appeal is unlikely to be heard soon, considering the absence of prior convictions.

Order :

ASHUTOSH KUMAR, J.

1. This is third application for suspension of sentence filed on behalf of the accused-applicant. The first application for suspension of sentence filed by the accused-applicant has been rejected by the Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 06.03.2019 passed in S.B. Criminal Misc. Suspension of Sentence Application No.97/2019 and the second application for suspension of sentence filed by the accused-applicant has been rejected by the Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 28.07.2023 passed in S.B. Criminal Misc. II Suspension of Sentence Application No.64/2022.

2. The present application for suspension of sentence has been filed by the accused-applicant under Section 430 of B.N.S.S., 2023 challenging the order dated 11.01.2019 passed by learned Special Judge, Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and Commission for Protection of Child Rights Act, 2005, No.2, Baran (hereinafter referred to as the 'trial Court') in Sessions Case No.09/2018 whereby, learned trial Court while dismissing the case filed on behalf of the accused-applicant, passed the order of conviction and sentence against the accused-applicant for the offences punishable:-

a) Under Section 366 of IPC- Five years simple imprisonment with fine of Rs.10,000/- in default thereof, further sentence of six months simple imprisonment.

b) Under Section 363 of IPC- Five years simple imprisonment with fine of Rs.10,000/- in default thereof, further sentence of six months simple imprisonment.

c) Under Section 376 of IPC- Ten years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.10,000/- in default thereof, further sentence of six months simple imprisonment.

d) Under Section 5(g)/6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012- Ten years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.10,000/- in default thereof, further sentence of six months simple imprisonment.

3. Feeling aggrieved of the order dated 11.01.2019 passed by the trial Court, the present third application for suspension has been filed by the accused-applicant.

4. Learned counsel for the accused-applicant submitted that vide order dated 11.01.2019, the maximum sentence awarded to the accused-applicant is ten years and as on 12.02.2025, he has served the sentence of 8 years, one months and 24 days without remission. Learned counsel further submitted that the accused- applicant has a strong prima-facie case in his favour and there is likelihood that the accused-applicant will succeed in the appeal.

5. Learned counsel for the accused-applicant contended that the accused-applicant is behind the bars since 20.12.2016. Learned counsel also contended that the appeal filed by the accused-applicant is pending since the year 2019 and there are no chances of hearing of the said appeal in near future, therefore, this third application filed on behalf of the accused-applicant be allowed and his sentence be suspended.

6. In support of his contentions, learned counsel for the accused-applicant placed reliance upon the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Saudan Singh Vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh {Criminal Appeal No.308/2022 [SLP (Crl.) No.4633/2021]}, dated 25.02.2022.

7. Learned Public Prosecutor while vehemently opposing the prayer made on behalf of the accused-applicant, submitted that the accused-applicant has been convicted for henious offences and therefore, he is not entitled for grant of benefit of bail. Learned Public Prosecutor has submitted the custody certificate of the accused-applicant dated 10.02.2025 and the same is taken on record.

8. Learned Public Prosecutor has submitted the report dated 12.02.2025 forwarded by SHO, Mahila Thana, District Baran, which reveals that the victim/complainant has duly been informed about filing of this third application for suspension of sentence. The report dated 12.02.2025 is taken on record.

9. Despite information, none appeared on behalf of the victim/complainant to oppose the prayer made on behalf of the accused-appl