Supreme Court – Daily Orders
X (Fictitious Name) (Victim Neighbour) vs State Of Rajasthan on 1 April, 2026
1
ITEM NO.2 COURT NO.7 SECTION II-D
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRIMINAL) Diary No.59446/2025
[Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 05-08-2025
in SBCRMTSOSA(A) No. 1423/2025 passed by the High Court of
Judicature for Rajasthan at Jaipur]
X (FICTITIOUS NAME) (VICTIM NEIGHBOUR) Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
STATE OF RAJASTHAN Respondent(s)
(IA No. 73007/2026 - CONDONATION OF DELAY IN REFILING SLP, IA
No. 74541/2026 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT
& IA No. 74540/2026 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.)
Date : 01-04-2026 This matter was called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.B. PARDIWALA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.V. VISWANATHAN
For Petitioner(s) :
Mr. Shubham Jain, AOR
For Respondent(s) :
Mr. Shiv Mangal Sharma, AAG
Mr. Puneet Parihar, Adv.
Ms. Aneesha Rastogi, Adv.
Ms. Nidhi Jaswal, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
1. Delay condoned.
2. Exemption Applications are allowed.
3. The petitioner was put to trial for the offence punishable
under Sections 363, 366, 344, 376(2)(n) of the Indian Penal Code
respectively (for short, “The IPC”)
Signature Not Verified
and Sections 5(l) and 6 of the
Digitally signed by
VISHAL ANAND
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short,
Date: 2026.04.01
16:10:01 IST
Reason:
“POCSO Act”) respectively.
2
4. At the end of the trial, the petitioner was held guilty of the
offence with which he was charged. The Trial Court sentenced him to
undergo 20 years of rigorous imprisonment for the offence
punishable under the POCSO Act.
5. Being dissatisfied with the judgment and order of conviction
passed by the Trial Court, the petitioner has preferred Criminal
Appeal No.1453 of 2023 in the High Court.
6. In the said appeal, the petitioner preferred an application
praying for suspension of the substantive order of sentence passed
by the Trial Court. The High Court declined to suspend the
substantive order sentence passed by the Trial Court.
7. In such circumstances, the petitioner is here before us with
the present petition.
8. We heard Mr. Shubham Jain, the learned counsel appearing for
the petitioner and Mr. Shiv Mangal Sharma, the learned Additional
Advocate General appearing for the State of Rajasthan.
9. We looked into the oral evidence on record, more particularly,
the oral testimony of the victim, her Statement before the learned
Magistrate recorded under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973 and other circumstances on record.
10. We are of the view that the petitioner has been able to make
out a case for suspension of the substantive order of sentence
imposed by the Trial Court.
11. We do not propose to observe anything further as Criminal
Appeal is pending before the High Court.
12. The substantive order of sentence passed by the Trial Court in
Sessions Case No.54/2021 decided by the Special Judge (Protection
of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012) and Commission for
Protection of Child Rights Act, 2005, No.-1, Ajmer, Rajasthan shall
remain suspended and the petitioner is ordered to be released on
bail, subject to terms and conditions that the Trial Court may deem
fit to impose.
13. In the result, this petition stands disposed of.
14. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.
(VISHAL ANAND) (POOJA SHARMA) DY. REGISTRAR COURT MASTER (NSH)
