Dismissed

Shivraj S/O Shri Buddharam v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC11 May 2022CRLMB/1293/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Rajasthan dismissed an anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. An Appeal Court declined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail for charges including rape, kidnapping, and POCSO-related offences. The judge deemed it improper to grant bail due to the prosecution's statement and the nature of the case, citing reliance on a superior court's judgment and a coor

What did the court decide?

The petitioner's anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. was dismissed; no Anticipatory Bail was granted.

Shivraj S/O Shri Buddharam Vs State of Rajasthan — Cheque Dishonour | Rajasthan HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 1293/2022

¶3

Shivraj S/o Shri Buddharam, R/o Sindoliya Ki Dhani, Peeh, Police Station Pilwa, Tehsil Parbatsar District Nagaur (Raj.)

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p.

¶7

----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vipin Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Riyasat Ali, PP

¶8

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA KUMAR SONGARA

¶9

Order

¶10

11/05/2022

¶11

This anticipatory bail application has been filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in connection with FIR No. 144/2021 registered at Police Station Chouth ka Barwada, District Sawaimadhopur for the offences under Sections 363, 366-A, 376(2)(n), 376-D, 354-A, 344 & 323 of IPC and Sections 5/6, 7/8 & 16/17 of POCSO Act.

¶12

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the FIR has been lodged after a delay of seven days. The petitioner was known to the co-accused Deeparam Choudhary and on his request, the petitioner had provided his vehicle to Deeparam. There is no direct or indirect evidence against the petitioner. Hence, the anticipatory bail application of the accused-petitioner may be granted.

¶13

During the course of argument, learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon the judgment of Hon’ble Apex

¶14

(2 of 2) [CRLMB-1293/2022]

¶15

Court rendered in the case of Mafat Lal & Anr. V/s State of Rajasthan (Criminal Appeal No. 592 of 2022) decided on 28.03.2022 and also on the order passed by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court passed in the case of Mafat Lal & Anr. V/s State of Rajasthan decided on 09.12.2020 (S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 591/2020.

¶16

On the other hand, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application.

¶17

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record and also judgment cited by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶18

As per the FIR, the prosecutrix is below 16 years and looking to her statements recorded under Sections 161 & 164 of CrPC and also her further police statement dated 30.08.2021, but without expressing any opinion on the merits and demerits of the case, I deem it not proper to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail.

¶19

Accordingly, this anticipatory bail application is dismissed.

¶20

(CHANDRA KUMAR SONGARA),J

¶21

PAYAL/17

Shivraj S/O Shri Buddharam v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shivraj S/O Shri Buddharam 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pawan Singh S/O Shri Karni Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Abdul Faizan S/O Shahzad Khan Vs State of Rajasthan

Arun Somra @ Chotu S/O Shri Mohar Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Batti Lal S/O Girraj Vs State of Rajasthan

Rohit @ Mahesh Yogi S/O Heera Lal Vs State of Rajasthan

Sarjeet Swami Son of Sumer Singh Vs State of Rajasthan