The single-judge bench considered a bail application challenging an arrest in a POCSO case involving molestation allegations. The court rejected the petitioner's claim that the victim improved her statement subsequently, holding the gravity of offences precluded bail.
Bail grant denied.
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. 11476/2022
Manish Kumar S/o Brajmohan, R/o Moti Nagar, Near Power House, Kherda, Police Station Mantown, Distt. Sawai Madhopur (At Present Lodge At Distt. Jail Sawai Madhopur)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P.
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ashindra Gautam, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Chandragupt Chopra, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND
Order
15/11/2022
This bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed by petitioner in connection with FIR No.51/2022 registered at Police Station Mahila Thana-Sawai Madhopur, District Sawai Madhopur wherein he is charged for offences punishable under Sections 323, 341, 354, 506 of IPC and under Sections 7 & 8 of POCSO (Amendments) Act, 2012 & 2019.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that for the incident dated 25.02.2022, two F.I.Rs., were lodged. Counsel submits that in the earlier F.I.R., the allegation regarding molesty of the victim was not mentioned. Subsequently, in the second F.I.R., the allegation was improved. Counsel submits that the statements of the victim were recorded under Sections 161 & 164 of Cr.P.C., in which the victim has improved her version. Counsel submits that under these circumstances, no reliance can be placed on such
(2 of 2) [CRLMB-11476/2022]
concocted version of prosecution and the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case. Counsel submits that after investigation, charge-sheet has been submitted and the petitioner is in judicial custody since 16.07.2022 and trial will take its own time to conclude it, so indulgence of bail be extended to the petitioner.
Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application.
Looking to the gravity of the matter and allegations against the petitioner levelled by the victim in her statements recorded under Sections 161 & 164 of Cr.P.C., I do not find it a fit case for grant of bail to the petitioner, hence, the present bail application
stands dismissed.
(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J
PRAVESH/31
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the attenuation of victim's statement from second FIR makes it a fit case for bail.
Whether the gravity of offences under IPC and POCSO warrants bail.
Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C.
9 provisions across 3 enactments
Manish Kumar
State Of Rajasthan
Anoop Kumar Dhand
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
