IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL APPEAL (AGAINST CONVICTION) NO. 3100 of 2025 With CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR SUSPENSION OF SENTENCE) NO.

1 of 2025 In R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 3100 of 2025 ==========================================================

PRATHAM GOVINDBHAI KISHANBHAI RATHOD Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.

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

Appearance:

MANAN V PATEL(8059) for the Appellant(s) No. 1 NOTICE NOT RECD BACK for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 2 MR. ADITYA JADEJA, APP for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE S.V. PINTO Date : 09/02/2026

ORAL ORDER

ORDER IN CRIMINAL APPEAL:-

1. Admit. Learned APP waives service of admission for and on behalf of the respondent State.

ORDER IN CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION:-

1. When the matter is called out respondent no.2 original – complainant is present in-person before this Court and submits that he does not want to engage an advocate on his behalf.

2. RULE. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appears and waives service of notice of rule on behalf of the respondent No.1 – State.

3. By way of the present application under Section 430 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Surakhsha Sanhita, 2023, the applicant - accused is seeking suspension of sentence and release on regular bail during pendency of the present appeal against the judgment and order of conviction dated 28.11.2025 passed in Special POCSO Case No. 269/2023 by the learned Special Judge (POCSO), Ahmedabad, whereby, the present applicant - accused was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment of 10 years and fine of Rs.25,000/- and in default, simple imprisonment of 3 years for the offence under Sections 3(a) and 4 of the POCSO Act.

4. Heard learned advocate Mr. Manan V. Patel for the applicant and learned APP Mr. Aditya Jadeja for the respondent No.1 - State.

5. Learned Advocate Mr. Manan V. Patel for the applicant submits that the applicant is a young boy and was 19-20 years of age on the date of incident. If the evidence of the prosecution is perused, it is a case of love-affair between the victim and the applicant and as per the case of the prosecution, the victim was 17 years and 3 months at the time of incident. The victim has in her statement recorded under Section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code, the victim has stated that she was having an affair with the applicant for the past five years and she was talking to the applicant but when her family members came to know about her affair, there were quarrels in the house. She had told her mother that she wanted to get married to the applicant but her mother did not agree and sent her to Ahmedabad to reside with her grandparents. While her grandparents were not at home, she went to meet the applicant and on her insistence, she eloped with him. She has stated that the applicant tried to explain to her but she did not agree and went of her own free will to Palanpur and thereafter, they came to the Police Station. The victim has not stated anything about any sexual assault being committed by the applicant in her statement under Section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code before the Magistrate. Learned advocate further submits that as far as the evidence of age is concerned, the prosecution has examined the Sub- Registrar, Mehsana Nagarpalika and has produced the birth certificate of the victim at Exh.17 and the extract of the Register at Exh.18 but the date of birth has not been proved beyond reasonable doubts. Moreover, the appeal is not likely to be heard in near future and hearing of the same would take some long time and hence, no purpose would be served by keeping the applicant in jail for indefinite period with hardened criminals. The applicant has a good case on merits and hence, the application may be allowed and the applicant be enlarged on bail pending hearing and final disposal of the captioned Criminal Appeal.

6. Learned APP Mr. Aditya Jadeja for the resp