Allowed

Akshat Katiyar S/O Shri Ram Kripal v. State of Rajasthan through Pp

Rajasthan HC19 Sept 2018CRLMB/10159/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order grants regular bail to the petitioner accused of rape, cheating, and criminal breach of trust. The court held it just and expedient to release him subject to Trial Court satisfaction, without expressing an opinion on the merits of the consent allegation made by the counsel.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner admitted to bail subject to satisfaction of the Trial Court.

Akshat Katiyar S/O Shri Ram Kripal Vs State of… — Cheating and Forgery | Rajasthan HC (2018)

¶1

(1 of 2)

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION NO. 10159/2018

¶4

Akshat Katiyar S/o Shri Ram Kripal, R/o H.no. 502, Kishan Nagar, Tehsil Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, Presently R/o Flat No. 203, Udb Orchid, Jaipur. (Petitioner Behind Bar In Central Jail, Jaipur)

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State of Rajasthan Through PP

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

__________________________________________ For Petitioner : Mr. Anoop Pareek

¶10

For Respondent : Mr. R.S. Raghav, P.P.

¶11

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA

¶12

Order

¶13

19/09/2018

¶14

Petitioner has filed this petition under Section 439 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 seeking regular bail in F.I.R. No.278/2018 registered at Police Station Bhankhrota, District Jaipur West for the offence under Sections 420, 406, 376 Indian Penal Code, 1860.

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the prosecutrix is a married lady, aged thirty two years and having children. Petitioner is also a married man having a child. As per the prosecution story, prosecutrix had been raped by the petitioner on the pretext that he would perform marriage with her. Since, both the parties were already married, there was no occasion for the petitioner to have developed relations with the prosecutrix on the pretext that he would perform marriage with her. Present case can be

¶16

(2 of 2)

¶17

said to be a case of a consent. Petitioner is in custody since 2.7.2018. Challan has already been presented in the court and conclusion of trial may take time.

¶18

Learned State Counsel, has opposed the petition.

¶19

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, it would be just and expedient to order the release of the petitioner on bail.

¶20

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this petition is allowed. Petitioner be admitted to bail subject to satisfaction of the Trial Court.

¶21

(SABINA)J.

¶22

Mohita/1

Akshat Katiyar S/O Shri Ram Kripal v. State of Rajasthan through Pp

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Akshat Katiyar S/O Shri Ram Kripal v. State of Rajasthan through Pp

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

Dhanraj S/O Sardar Singh by Caste Pardi Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Ajeet Kumar S/O Premsingh B/C Jat Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Arvind S/O Samandar B/C Jat Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Om Prakash@Omi S/O Bhanaram B/C Jat Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Mahipal Singh S/O Shri Banwari Lal B/C Jat Vs State of Rajasthan through P.P.

Manish S/O Badam B/C Meena Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp