##PAGE1##

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/CR.A/226/2026 IA ORDER DATED: 30/04/2026

0.43763971568713667

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

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

1 of 2026

In R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 226 of 2026

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

MAHIPATBHA @ KAYDI RANMALBHA KER

Versus

STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.

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

Appearance:

MR. AAMIR S PATHAN(7142) for the PETITIONER(s) No. 1

NOTICE SERVED for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 2

MS. C.M. SHAH, APP for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1

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

CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE S.V. PINTO

Date : 30/04/2026

IA ORDER

1. RULE. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appears

and waives service of notice of rule on behalf of the

respondent-State.

2. 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 passed

by the learned 2^nd Additional Sessions Judge & Special

Court, POCSO Act, Dwarka in POCSO Case No. 14/2023

dated 10.12.2024, whereby, the present applicant - accused

was sentenced to the following term:

Page 1 of 7

Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Thu Apr 30 2026 Downloaded on : Fri May 01 01:48:05 IST 2026

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/CR.A/226/2026 IA ORDER DATED: 30/04/2026

0.43763971568713667

Offence u/s Sentence In default of

payment

447 of IPC Rigorous imprisonment Rigorous

for 3 months and fine of imprisonment for

Rs. 500/- 15 days

506(2) of IPC Rigorous imprisonment Rigorous

for 5 years and fine of Rs. imprisonment for 6

5000/- months

8 of POCSO Act Rigorous imprisonment Rigorous

for 5 years and fine of Rs. imprisonment for 6

5000/- months

All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

3. Heard learned advocate Mr. Aamir Pathan for the

applicant and learned APP Ms. C.M. Shah for the

respondent State.

4. Learned Advocate Mr. Aamir Pathan for the applicant

submits that the applicant has been sentenced for a fixed

period of 5 years and the applicant has already completed

more than half of the awarded sentence i.e. substantial

period of 2 years and 7 months and 20 days in jail and the

application may be considered in light of the decisions of the

Apex Court in the case of Saudan Singh Vs. State of

Chhatisgarh passed in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl) No.

4633 of 2021 and also in the case of Atul @ Ashutosh V.

State of Madhya Pradesh in Criminal Appeal No. 579 of

Page 2 of 7

Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Thu Apr 30 2026 Downloaded on : Fri May 01 01:48:05 IST 2026

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/CR.A/226/2026 IA ORDER DATED: 30/04/2026

0.43763971568713667

2024 on 02.02.2024. Learned advocate submits that the

present 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 suspension may

be allowed and the applicant be enlarged on bail pending

the hearing and final disposal of the captioned Criminal

Appeal.

5. Learned APP for the respondent – State has strongly

objected to the submissions made by the learned advocate

for the applicant and has submitted the jail remarks which

shows that the applicant has undergone 2 years and 7

months and 20 days in jail and that learned Trial Court has

rightly convicted the present applicant as he has been

involved in a very serious offence, however has requested

this Court to pass necessary orders considering the period

of sentence undergone.

6. At the outset, it would be appropriate to refer to the

Page 3 of 7

Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Thu Apr 30 2026 Downloaded on : Fri May 01 01:48:05 IST 2026

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/CR.A/226/2026 IA ORDER DATED: 30/04/2026

0.43763971568713667

observation of the Apex Court in the case of Atul @

As