Dismissed

Dipesh Rathor v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC18 Jan 2019MCRC/500/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

HC of Chhattisgarh dismissed a second bail application filed by a minor accused in connection with gang-rape charges under POCSO and IPC, holding that the detailed statement of the prosecutrix was sufficient to reject the application without entering into evidence evaluation at this stage.

What did the court decide?

Second bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. rejected; applicant not released on bail.

Dipesh Rathor Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Caste Atrocities | Chhattisgarh HC (2019)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶2

MCRC No. 500 of 2019

¶3

Dipesh Rathor, S/o. Makhanlal Rathod, Aged About 18 Years, R/o. Durpa, Police Station Baradwar, District Janjgir- Champa, Chhattisgarh.

¶4

---- Applicant

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Chhattisgarh, Through Station House Officer, Police Station Baradwar, District Janjgir Champa, Chhattisgarh.

¶7

---- Respondent

¶8

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------For Applicant : Mr. Ravindra Sharma, Advocate For Respondent : Mr. R.K.Bhagat, Dy. Govt. Advocate

¶9

Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri

¶10

Order On Board

¶11

18.01.2019

¶12

This is the second bail application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 128/2018 registered at Police Station- Baradwar, District JanjgirChampa (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 363, 366, 376(Ä)/34 of Indian Penal Code, Section 6 of POCSO Act & Section 3(1-12), 3(2)(5) of Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The first bail application was dismissed as withdrawn on 30.10.2018 with liberty to repeat the same after examination of the prosecutrix.

¶13

Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 12.05.2018 a report was made by the prosecutrix that she was subjected to gang-rape, thereafter, few of the boys prepared a video and on that basis the other boys also started exploiting her sexually over a period of time and the present applicant was also one of them.

¶14

Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the accused are minors and the earlier bail application was dismissed as withdrawn on 30.10.2018 with liberty to repeat the same after examination of the prosecutrix and the prosecutrix has been examined, she has not identified the present applicant; therefore, the applicant may be released on bail.

¶15

Per contra, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of bail.

¶16

Perused the statement of the prosecutrix. Detailed and positive statement has been made. At this stage, it would not be proper for this Court to evaluate the entire evidence while deciding the bail application. It is for the trial Court to examine the same alongwith other facts which would be on record. Considering the statement of the prosecutrix, I am not inclined to entertain this bail application.

¶17

Accordingly, the second bail application filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. is rejected.

¶18

Sd/- (Goutam Bhaduri) Judge

¶19

Ashok

Dipesh Rathor v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dipesh Rathor v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Man Bahadur and Ganga Singh Vs State of Cg

Poshan Lal Vs State Of Chhattisgarh And Anr.

Baikunth Lal Soni Vs Smt. Rukhsana Parveen

Tarun Nayak Vs Smt. Chamali Nayak

Bharat Lal Sharma Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Roshan Lal Burman Vs State of Chhattisgarh