An extra-terrestrial style order granting bail to the petitioner in a sexual offence case without commenting on merits, finding continuous detention not warranted.
Petitioner released on bail during pendency of trial to the satisfaction of the trial court.
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.
S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 6036/2016 Luccky vs. State of Rajasthan
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR
O R D E R
S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 6036/2016 Luccky vs. State of Rajasthan
Date of Order:- 27th May, 2016
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA
Mr. Kapil Gupta, for the petitioner. Mr. N.S. Dhakad, Public Prosecutor for the State.
Present application has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of a regular bail to the petitioner in a case arising out of FIR No. 43/2015, registered at police station Mahila Thana, Alwar, for the offences under Sections 262, 366A and 376 IPC.
The learned counsel for the petitioner has read the statement of the prosecutrix recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. and her statement recorded as witness in the trial court. The prosecutrix in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. and in the court had stated that on 11.3.2015 in the night at about 11:00 PM, she had accompanied the accused in a vehicle to Jaipur. They stayed together at Jaipur for 10-15 days, where accused had forcibly established sexual intercouse. She further stated that one day after taking some money out of the pocket of the accused, the prosecutrix returned back to Alwar. In cross-examination, the prosecutrix stated that the fact that she accompanied the present
S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 6036/2016 Luccky vs. State of Rajasthan
2
petitioner was not disclosed by her to her parents or grant-parents or siblings. She further stated that she was in constant touch with the accused on mobile phone.
According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner is in custody since 18.6.2015.
Without commenting on the merits of the case, lest it may not prejudice the either side, this Court is of the view that continuous detention of the petitioner as an under trial is not warranted.
Hence, the present bail application is accepted and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail during the pendency of the trial, to the satisfaction of the trial court.
(KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA)J.
Mak/
All corrections made in the judgment/order have been incorporated in the judgment/order being emailed.” Anil Makawana P.A.
11
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the continuous detention of the petitioner as an undertrial warrants bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Luccky
State of Rajasthan
Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
