State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P v. For

: Mr. Shafiqur Rahman For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vijay Singh Yadav with Mr. Gaurav Gupta, AAAG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN Order 12/05/2025

1. Instant application for suspension of sentence is preferred by appellant-accused Kuldeep son of Beetulal in pending appeal filed aggrieved from order of conviction and sentence dated

09.06.2023 in sessions case No. 52/2019 passed by learned Special Judge (POCSO Act Cases) No.2, Sikar whereby appellant was convicted for offence under Sections 363, 366, 344, 376(2) (n) IPC and Section 5(L)/6, 5(j)(ii)/6 of POCSO Act sentenced accordingly.

2. Learned counsel for appellant while relying upon grounds of appeal submits that this is a false and concocted case filed under the pressure of family of victim. He further submits that the evidence on record suggests that victim has voluntarily left her [2025:RJ-JP:19977] (2 of 5) [SOSA-982/2023] home and traveled on her own. He also referred post recovery statements recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and submits that the victim was wearing a “Mangalsutra” and she herself posed as married woman. He also referred the contradictory and unreliable evidence of prosecution about age of victim and submits that as per Ex. D.3, the date of birth of victim was 13.03.1998 and this certificate was issued by Village Pachayat Khatu Shyam Ji, District Sikar on 06.02.2013. He further submits that after recovery, the statement of victim was recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. and she has denied rape by present appellant. He further referred Ex. P-29 and submits that even victim has denied for medical. He further submitted that in the instant case under the influence of uncle of victim, the record of date of birth was manipulated and on basis of direct admission in Class-II, Ex. P-13 was prepared wherein the date of birth was shown as 07.02.2002. He has further referred the admission of PW-1 (victim) and submits that the admission of victim indicate that Ex. D-3 birth certificate belongs to her. He further referred the admission of victim and submits that she was in relationship with present appellant as she likes present appellant-accused. He also referred the statement of parents of victim PW-2 and PW-5 and submits that from their admission, the age of victim is more than 20 years and victim has voluntarily left her home. He also referred the medical evidence and other evidence and submits that no injuries was found to show that the victim was forcibly rape by appellant-accused. At last, he submits that appellant-accused was on bail during trial and he has not misused the liberty granted to him and disposal of appeal will take its own time. [2025:RJ-JP:19977] (3 of 5) [SOSA-982/2023]

3. Aforesaid contentions were opposed by learned Public Prosecutor and he submitted report received from Police Station Khatu Shyam Ji, District Sikar along with intimation to complainant and latest custody certificate.

4. Heard learned counsel for appellant along with learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.

5. On basis of report Ex. P-8 filed by PW-5 (father of victim) FIR No. 73/2019 was registered on 10.04.2019 under Sections 363 and 366-A IPC. The victim was recovered on 16.05.2019 and details were mentioned in Ex. P-1. The statement of victim was recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and exhibited as Ex. D-1 and under Section 164 Cr.P.C. Ex. D-2. The victim was sent to Balika Grah. After investigation, a charge-sheet was filed against the appellant-accused. The prosecution has examined 14 witnesses and exhibited 30 documents. The accused was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and he has not submitted any defence evidence but exhibited 3 documents. The Trial Court has convicted appellant-accused under Sections 363, 366, 344, 376(2)(n) IPC and Sections 5(L)/6, 5(j)(ii)/6 of POCSO Act. The maximum sentence awarded to present appellant is 10 years.

6. The record indicate that appellant-accused was released on bail in pursuant to order dated 19.11.2020 in bail application No. 12789/2020 by a Co-ordinate bench of this Court and he remained on bail during trial. The appellant-accused is in custody and the period of custody till date is 3 years 9 months and 6 days. There is no other criminal antecedents against the appellant. The prosecution has claimed date of birth of victim as 07.02.2002 and the Trial Court on basis of date of birth has determined the age of [2025:RJ-JP:19977] (4 of 5) [SOSA-982/2023] victim between 17-18 years. The appellant-accused has exhibited Ex. D-3 birth certificate of victim issued by Village Pachayat Khatu Shyam Ji, District Sikar on 06.02.2013 and admission of PW-1 (victim) indicate that this birth certificate was given to accused by her. As per this birth certificate, the date of birth of victim is

13.03.1998 and she was major on date of incident. The grounds raised by learned counsel for appellant can be considered at the time of final adjudication of the matter but not now.

7. We have considered the statement under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. recorded just after the recovery of victim and also considered all circumstances of the case. Herein, this case it is quite surprising that despite availability of school record and also birth certificate, an ossification test was conducted by police wherein the age of victim was opined as 14-18 years and this variation is something which doubts the bona fides of the Medical Board. Herein, this case the victim was medically examined and we have gone through the report Ex. P.11 and P.12. We have also considered cross-examination of mother of victim (PW-2) and father of victim (PW-5). We have also considered the cross- examination of IO PW-13 and PW-14. At this stage, it is not possible for us to express any opinion on the merits of the case but considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, it is appropriate to allow SOS application.

8. In view of discussion made hereinabove, the suspension of sentence application is hereby allowed and it is ordered that sentence of appellant-applicants accused Kuldeep son of Beetulal is suspended till disposal of appeal with the condition that he would execute a personal bond in the sum of ₹50,000/- [2025:RJ-JP:19977] (5 of 5) [SOSA-982/2023] with two sureties of ₹25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for his appearance in this Court on

22.08.2025 and whenever ordered to do so till the disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated below:-

1. That the appellant-accused shall not indulge in any criminal activity and not repeat crime of any nature during period of suspension of sentence/bail.

2. That the appellant-accused shall not contact or connect directly or indirectly with victim or any of her family member.

3. That the appellant will appear before the Trial Court in the month of January of every year till the appeal is decided.

4. That if the appellant changes the place of residence, he will give in writing his changed address to the trial Court as well as to the counsel in the High Court.

5. Similarly, if the sureties change their address(s), they will give in writing their changed address to the trial Court.

9. In case, the applicants have violated any condition then the order of suspension of sentence shall be recalled and canceled.

10. Misc. Application stands disposed of.

11. A copy of this order be sent to learned trial court through E-mail. MONU /04 (ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J