In a bail application, the High Court at Jaipur rejected the argument of false implication. The court held that pending investigation for gang rape and other serious offences made the applicant ineligible for anticipatory bail.
The miscellaneous bail application is dismissed.
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.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 15966/2019
Radheshyam Meena S/o Shri Kalyan Sahai Meena B/c Meena, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Vill. Goner Tehsil Sanganer Ps Shivdaspura Dist. Jaipur Raj.
----Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan, through PP
----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr.Anil Kumar Upman For Respondent(s) : Mr.Ramesh Choudhary, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GOVERDHAN BARDHAR
Order
14/12/2019
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Public Prosecutor.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. The victim is a 32 years old lady and she has not levelled allegation of rape against the applicant. The applicant has no connection with the alleged offence, applicant has been roped with malafide intention to extort money from the applicant and moreover no custodial interrogation is required.
Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application and argued that the applicant took the victim alongwith him in a car to facilitate other accused persons. The applicant was a conspirator in the offence. Learned Public
(2 of 2)
[CRLMB-15966/2019]
Prosecutor further submitted that in the complaint the complainant has levelled allegation of gang rape.
Taking note of the seriousness of allegations levelled in the complaint by the victim keeping in mind that investigation for the offence under Sections 341, 323, 365, 342, 379 and 376-D of IPC is pending. It is not a fit case where the applicant can be granted benefit of anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C.
Accordingly, the misc. bail application is dismissed.
(GOVERDHAN BARDHAR), J
Himanshu Soni/375/5
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant is a fit case for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. given the pending investigation for serious offences.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Radheshyam Meena
State of Rajasthan
GOVERDHAN BARDHAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
