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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Guj) 4325

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA
MAHIPALSINH LAXMANSINH PARMARV/sSTATE OF GUJARAT
R/CR.A/296/2026



##PAGE1##

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/CR.A/296/2026 IA ORDER DATED: 24/03/2026

0.028987456714152926

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR SUSPENSION OF SENTENCE) NO.

1 of 2026 In R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 296 of 2026 ==========================================================

MAHIPALSINH LAXMANSINH PARMAR Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.

==========================================================

Appearance:

MR DEVANSH N KAKKAD(12134) for the PETITIONER(s) No. 1 MR JIMIT P SHAH(9917) for the PETITIONER(s) No. 1 MR DARSHAN P DAVE(5928) for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 2

MS KRINA CALLA APP for the RESPONDENT No. 1 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA and

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. T. VACHHANI Date : 24/03/2026

IA ORDER

(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA)

1. Rule. Learned APP waives service of Rule on behalf of respondent State. By consent, Rule is fixed forthwith.

2. By way of this application under Section 430 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, applicant, seeks suspension of sentence awarded to him by the Sessions Court concerned for the offence punishable under Section 354(a)(c)(d), 376(2)(n) of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 4, 5(l) & 6, 15 of Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act and Section

66(3) and 67 of I.T. Act.

Page 1 of 5 Uploaded by P.S. JOSHI(HC00177) on Tue Mar 24 2026 Downloaded on : Sun Mar 29 19:28:25 IST 2026

##PAGE2##

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/CR.A/296/2026 IA ORDER DATED: 24/03/2026

0.028987456714152926

3. The present appeal and the application for suspension of sentence arise from the judgment dated 22.01.2026 and order of sentence passed in Special POCSO Case No.23 of 2024, whereby, the applicant

herein was convicted and sentenced as under:

Section Imprisonment Fine In default
354 (a)(c)(d) of IPC RI for 3 yrs 1000 SI for 1 month
S.5(l) & 6 of POCSO Act RI for 20 yrs 5000 SI for 3 months
376(2)(n) of IPC r/w S.4 of POCSO Act RI for 10 yrs 1000 SI for 1 month
S.15 of POCSO Act RI for 3 yrs 1000 SI for 1 month
S.66(e) & 67 of The I.T. Act RI for 1 yr 1000 SI for 1 month

4. Facts and circumstances giving rise to file present application are that the applicant herein was in relation with the minor victim and the period of relations was from 22.11.2022 to 23.04.2024 and during said period, they maintained physical relationship. Due to some reason, the relation was not continued and thereafter, the applicant was pressurized the victim to maintain relationship and also threatened that if she would not maintain relationship, then he will viral her photographs and

Page 2 of 5 Uploaded by P.S. JOSHI(HC00177) on Tue Mar 24 2026 Downloaded on : Sun Mar 29 19:28:25 IST 2026

##PAGE3##

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/CR.A/296/2026 IA ORDER DATED: 24/03/2026

0.028987456714152926

videos on social media and after some time, he had circulated the same on the social media account of the victim’s family. In such circumstances, the FIR came to be lodged and upon due investigation, the accused was put on trial and at the conclusion of the trial, the court held guilty the accused for the

offences as referred above.

5. Learned advocate Mr. J. P. Shah, appearing on behalf of the applicant while praying for suspension of sentence contended that, this is a case of love affair and after the break up, the accused was insisting the victim to maintain relationship, which was the reason for filing the FIR. There was no report of the FSL that, the photos and videos were being shared from the mobile of the accused. The incarceration period is 1 year and 10 months and there are no possibility of early hearing of the appeal. In such circumstances, it is prayed that the prayers as prayed may be

considered.

6. On the other hand, Ms. Krina Calla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor and Mr. Darshan P. Dave, learned advocate for the complainant have supported the impugned judgment and order of conviction as passed by the trial Court and contended that the vi

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