This order dismisses a second bail application filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. The petitioner was arrested for offences including rape and kidnapping. The High Court refused bail, holding that the child victim specifically named the accused in her statement, negating any claim for bail.
Bail application dismissed at this stage.
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 AT JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous II Bail Application No. 7372/2022
Samir S/o Sh. Ishab @ Yusuf, Aged About 26 Years, R/o Gharsisar Police Station Sardar Shahar Distt. Churu At Present Abdul Chairman Ki Badi Biggabas Police Station Sridungargarh, Distt. Bikaner (Raj.) (Presently Lodged In Central Jail, Bikaner)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent
| For Petitioner(s) | : Mr. Kaushal Gautam |
|---|---|
| For Respondent(s) | : Mr. Shrawan Bishnoi, PP |
| Mr. Abhishek Mehta |
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG
Order
09/09/2022
The present second bail application has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. The petitioner has been arrested in connection with FIR No.374/2020 Police Station Sridungargarh, District Bikaner for the offence punishable under Sections 363, 366, 376(3), 342, 506 of IPC, Sections 3(1)(W), 3(2)(5)(5A) of SC/ST (POA) Act and Section 3/4 of POCSO Act, 2012.
The first bail application was dismissed vide order dated 17.06.2021 by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court as not press with liberty to file a fresh bail application after examination of the child victim.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that now child victim has been examined before the Court as PW-1, there are material contradictions, improvements and omissions in her
(2 of 2)
[CRLMB-7372/2022]
statement. The accused-petitioner is in judicial custody and the trial of the case will take sufficient long time to be concluded. Therefore, the benefit of bail should be granted to the accusedpetitioner.
Learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the complainant have vehemently opposed the bail application.
I have considered the arguments advanced before me and gone through the material available on record.
That child victim is aged about 15 years and according to the statement of her (PW-1), child victim specifically mentioned the name of the present petitioner for committing rape with her, therefore, no case for grant of bail is made out.
Hence, the present second bail application filed by the petitioner is hereby dismissed at this stage.
(MANOJ KUMAR GARG),J
22-raksha/-
2 issues framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner where the child victim has specifically named him in her statement.
Whether material contradictions in the child victim's statement justify granting bail.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Samir S/o Sh. Ishab @ Yusuf
State Of Rajasthan
Manoj Kumar Garg
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
