IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION (FOR SUSPENSION OF SENTENCE)

NO. 1 of 2026 In R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 122 of 2026 ==========================================================

DINESH S/O PARSHURAM SHANTIRAM SADHU Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.

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

Appearance:

ADITYA R GUNDECHA(8869) for the PETITIONER(s) No. 1 NOTICE SERVED THRU CONCERNED POLICE STATION for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 2 MR JAY MEHTA APP for the RESPONDENT No. 1 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. T. VACHHANI Date : 09/03/2026

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 Sections 363, 366 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 4 (2) & 6 of Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act.

3. The present appeal and the application for suspension of sentence arise from the judgment dated

02.01.2026 and order of sentence passed in Special POCSO Case No.23 of 2023, whereby, the applicant herein was convicted and sentenced as under:

4. Facts and circumstances giving rise to file present application are that the minor victim aged about 17 years and 9 months, due to intimate relations with the applicant – accused, remained in his company, for about 25 days. In these background, on the basis of complaint with respect to sexual assault and abuse, the chargesheet against the accused came to be filed and the trial Court, at the conclusion of the trial, held guilty the accused for the offences referred above.

5. Learned advocate Mr. Aditya R. Gundecha, appearing on behalf of the applicant while praying for suspension of sentence contended that, the victim was at the verge of completion of her 18 years age, and she was matured enough to take decision of her life and on that basis, she had been lived with the accused. The applicant was throughout on bail and having regard to the pendency of the appeal, there are no chances of early hearing of the conviction appeal. In such circumstances, it is prayed that the prayer may be considered.

6. On the other hand, Mr. Jay Mehta, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has supported the impugned judgment and order of conviction as passed by the trial Court and contended that the victim was minor and the defense as raised, cannot be considered at this stage.

7. Though served, no body appears on behalf of respondent no. 2.

8. Issue arises as to whether the applicant has made out a case for suspension of sentence?

9. We have carefully examined the case records and considered the submissions made at the bar. It is no doubt true that at relevant time, the victim had crossed 17 years and 6 months, and she had been in the company of accused for about 25 days. In such circumstances, having regard to the nature of relations and period of incarceration, we are persuaded to exercise our discretion in favour of the applicant convict for the purpose of suspension of sentence and grant of bail.

10. Accordingly, present application is allowed. Rule is made absolute to aforesaid extent. The sentence of the applicant awarded vide judgment dated 02.01.2026 by the learned Special (POCSO) Judge, Mehsana in Special (POCSO) Case No. 23 of 2023 is suspended during the pendency of the Criminal Appeal and the applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs.10,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court subject to