CrPC bail application for anticipatory relief dismissed. Court held that the petitioner's threat to the prosecutrix following FIR registration provided no ground for anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC, leading to rejection of the plea.
Anticipatory bail petition dismissed due to threats against prosecutrix after FIR registration.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR
ORDER
S.B. CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION NO.1995/2016
Amit Gupta, Aged about 32 years, s/o Shri Mohan Lal Gupta, r/o B-82, L.S. Nagar, nayakheda, Vidhyadhar nagar, Jaipur office address: T-308, Windsor Plaza, Sansar Chandra Road, Jaipur
Versus
Date of Order: January 9, 2017
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA
Mr. Mahendra Gaur, for the petitioner. Mr. R.R. Baisla, P.P. for the State.
Mr. Rajneesh Gupta, for the complainant.
Petitioner has filed this petition under Section 438 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 seeking anticipatory bail in FIR No.27/2016 registered at Police Station Jyoti Nagar, Jaipur (South), Jaipur, for offences u/S. 376 Indian Penal Code 1860.
As per the prosecution story, petitioner had developed sexual relations with the prosecutrix on the pretext that he would provide her a job. It is also the case of the prosecutrix that the petitioner had been forcing her to continue with the physical relations with him by threatening her that he would put her obscene photographs on the facebook.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that both the petitioner and the prosecutrix were already married. Infact, it was a pure case of consent. Learned counsel has denied
the allegations that the petitioner had ever threatened the prosecutrix.
Learned State Counsel, who is assisted by counsel for the complainant, on the other hand, has opposed the petition and has submitted that after the registration of the FIR petitioner has threatened the prosecutrix. In this regard, complaint was filed by the prosecutrix and proceedings under Sections 107 & 111 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 have been initiated in August, 2016.
Keeping in view the fact that the petitioner has been threatening the prosecutrix after the lodging of the present FIR and proceedings under Sections 107 & 111 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 have been initiated against the petitioner, no ground for grant of anticipatory bail to him is made out. Dismissed.
(SABINA),J.
Tanwar/P.A.
Item No.1
2 issues framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC should be granted to the petitioner amid allegations of threats against the prosecutrix.
If the existence of a threat after FIR registration precludes the grant of anticipatory bail under Section 376 IPC.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Amit Gupta
State of Rajasthan
Raghuveer Singh Bhati
Sabina
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
