Allowed

Mohammad Rijwan v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC6 Dec 2018CRLMB/12239/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner facing multiple offences including those under POCSO Act filed second bail application citing substantial change in circumstances as prosecution witnesses failed to identify him during trial. High Court accepted the bail application.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail provision; he furnish a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties of like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court.

Mohammad Rijwan Vs State of Rajasthan — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Rajasthan HC (2018)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail No. 12239/2018

¶3

Mohammad Rijwan S/o Noor Mohammad Qureshi, Aged About 24 Years, B/c Muslim, 01 Nayagaon , P.S. Kotwali Pali, Distt. Pali (Raj)

¶4

(Lodged At Distt. Jail Pali)

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vivek Shrimali For Respondent(s) : Mr. A.S. Rathore, P.P., for the State

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.K. LOHRA

¶11

Order

¶12

06/12/2018

¶13

Accused-petitioner, facing trial for offence punishable under Sections 341, 323, 354, 354-A, 354-B, 504, 509 IPC and Sections 9(g)/10 & 9(m)/10 of the POCSO Act, in Sessions Case No.202/2017 pending before Special Judge, POCSO Act Cases, Pali, has laid this second bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C.

¶14

The aforesaid sessions case is founded on FIR No.336/2017 registered at Police Station Kotwali, District Pali.

¶15

The first bail application at the behest of petitioner was dismissed on 09.11.2017.

¶16

Pressing this second bail application, it is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that after rejection of first bail application there is substantial change in the circumstances. For

¶17

(2 of 3)

¶18

[CRLMB-12239/2018]

¶19

substantiating his arguments in this behalf, it is contended by learned counsel that during trial, statements of P.W.1 Ms.‘K’, P.W.2 Ms.'R’ and P.W.3 Ms.'J’ (minor) have been recorded and none of these witnesses have attributed any overt-act, much less act constituting the charged offences. It is also submitted by learned counsel that P.W.1 has not even identified the petitioner when she deposed before the Court and, on the contrary, she has identified the other three accused, viz., Saddam and two Irshad. By highlighting this material change in the circumstances, learned counsel submits that in that background, considering the fact that petitioner is in custody since 27.07.2017 his second application for bail merits favourable consideration.

¶20

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed this second bail application of petitioner in general.

¶21

I have bestowed my consideration to the arguments advanced at the Bar and also considered the material change in the circumstances sought to be canvassed by learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶22

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, while refraining to make any comment on merits, I feel persuaded to accept this second application for bail.

¶23

Accordingly, this second bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that accused-petitioner, Mohammad Rijwan S/o Noor Mohammad Qureshi, arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.336/2017, Police Station Kotwali, District Pali, may be released on bail; provided he furnishes a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of like amount to

¶24

(3 of 3)

¶25

[CRLMB-12239/2018]

¶26

the satisfaction of learned trial Court with the stipulation to appear before that Court on all dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.

¶27

(P.K. LOHRA),J

¶28

114-Bharti/-

Mohammad Rijwan v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohammad Rijwan v. State of Rajasthan

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

Smt. Shashi and Anr. Vs Manohar Lal

Netaram Vs Nand Kishore and Ors.

Executive Officer, Nagarpalika, Deshnok Vs Lichhudan and Ors.

Dinesh Vs State of Rajasthan

Nirmal Singh Vs Priyvrat

Priyvrat Vs Mahindra Singh