Single judge bench considered a SOS application challenging conviction for penetrative sexual assault on a child under twelve. Bench dismissed application citing severity of offense and upheld trial court findings.
Application for suspension of sentence dismissed. Matter listed for hearing in August 2025.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
[2025:RJ-JP:16012]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal) No. 507/2023
In
S.B. Criminal Appeal No.516/2023
Ramtudu S/o Ringta Tudu, Resident Of Utar Parol Post Office Shakuntala Police Station Chowkiliya Distrit Utar Dinazpur (West Bengal) At Present Labour Graphic Marble Factory Udyog Nagar, Alwar (Rajasthan) (At Present Confined In Central Jail Alwar)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor
----Respondent
| For Petitioner(s) | : Mr. Kapil Gupta with |
|---|---|
| Mr. Chitransh Saxena & Mr. | |
| Dharmendra Kumar | |
| For Respondent(s) | : Mr. Vijay Singh Yadav, PP |
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN
Order
09/04/2025
[2025:RJ-JP:16012]
[SOSA-507/2023]
(2 of 3)
He also submits that there was no injury on body of the victim, but the Trial Court has ignored the cross-examination of doctor. He also submits that no one has witnessed the incident. He also submits that victim is a child and she is a tutored witness. He also submits that the material contradictions were ignored by the Trial Court. He further submitted that medical was conducted at 01.25 whereby FIR was registered at 02.35. He also referred the findings recorded by the Trial Court and submitted that without any justifiable reason, applicant-accused was convicted and sentenced. 3. Aforesaid contentions were opposed by learned Public Prosecutor and he submits custody certificate and complainant was already informed. 4. Heard learned counsel for applicant and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the record. 5. On basis of a written report (Ex.P-6) filed by father of victim about sexual assault with her five years old daughter FIR No.425/2022 was registered at P.S. Udhyognagar, District Alwar under Sections 376 IPC and 3/4 POCSO Act. After investigation, police has filed a charge-sheet against the applicant-accused. After framing of the charge, the applicant-accused has faced trial and during trial 15 witnesses were examined and 21 documents were exhibited by prosecution. Applicant-accused was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and he opted not to file defence evidence. The Trial Court has convicted present applicant under Section 363, 366A and 376AB IPC and Section 5M/6 POCSO Act. 6. A perusal of record indicate that within few hours of the incident, the matter was reported to police and on very same day, the victim was taken to the hospital. A copy of FIR (Ex.P-7)
[2025:RJ-JP:16012]
[SOSA-507/2023]
(3 of 3)
indicate that FIR was drawn at 02.33 AM, whereas information was received at 02.15 AM. Victim was medically examined by Dr. Kalpana Mathur on 27.06.2022 and there was abnormality in vagina of victim. The hymen was freshly torned. Dr. Kalpana Mathur was examined as PW-14 and in her statement, she has proved report (Ex.P-5), there was a discharge present outside vagina and reddishness over vagina. PW-14 has collected sample for FSL and FSL report was exhibited as Ex.P-12. The applicantaccused was medically examined by PW-11 (Dr. P.C. Saini) on 29.06.2022.
(ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J
GAURAV /37
2 issues framed by the court
Whether suspension of sentence should be granted to an accused convicted under Sections 363, 366A, 376AB IPC and Sections 5M/6 POCSO Act.
Whether the material contradictions raised by the applicant in cross-examination and medical reports warrant suspension of sentence.
5 provisions across 2 enactments
Ramtudu S/o Ringta Tudu
State Of Rajasthan
Ashok Kumar Jain
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
