This is a bail application in a rape case. The petitioner argued the FIR was delayed and the victim sustained no external injuries. The court rejected these submissions due to the gravity of the offence and the victim's consistent statement.
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.
[2023:RJ-JP:13222]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 2nd Bail Application No. 1141/2023 Ramesh Chand Saini Son of Shri Indra Lal Saini, aged about 34 Years, Resident of Asan Gathda, Police Station Tahla, District Alwar (Raj.) (At Present Petitioner Is Confined In Central Jail Alwar)
----Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan, through Public Prosecutor
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. G.L. Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mahendra Meena, Public Prosecutor
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA KUMAR SONGARA Order
04/07/2023
This second bail application has been filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. in connection with FIR No.0093/2022 registered at Police Station Tahla, District Alwar for the offences under Sections 376, 354 & 506 of IPC.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the prosecutrix is major and the impugned FIR has been lodged after an inordinate delay of seven days. As per medical examination report of victim, there is no external injury. The petitioner is behind the bars since 05.06.2022. Counsel further submits that first bail application of the petitioner was dismissed by this Court vide its order dated 06.09.2022 and he was given liberty to file afresh after recording the statement of the prosecutrix. During trial, statement of victim has been recorded as PW-1 by the learned trial Court. Therefore, looking to the statement of victim
(2 of 2) [CRLMB-1141/2023]
[2023:RJ-JP:13222]
and facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner may kindly be released on bail.
Learned Public Prosecutor has strongly opposed the bail application.
Heard. Perused the material available on record.
As per FIR, victim is about 18 years of age and the petitioner is 34 years of age. The victim in her statements recorded under Sections 161 & 164 of Cr.P.C. has levelled allegation of rape against the petitioner. As per medical examination report of victim, final opinion will be given after FSL Report and FSL Report is still pending.
During trial, statement of victim has been recorded as PW-1 and she is not hostile witness. Therefore, looking to the above facts & circumstances of the case, gravity of the offence and the statement of victim recorded during trial as PW-1 but without expressing any opinion on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it not proper to enlarge the petitioner on bail.
Accordingly, the second bail application of the petitioner under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. is dismissed .
(CHANDRA KUMAR SONGARA),J
Satyendra/11
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner should be released on bail in a rape case given the victim's statement and pending FSL report.
Whether the inordinate delay in lodging the FIR entitles the accused to bail.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Ramesh Chand Saini
State of Rajasthan
Chandra Kumar Songara
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
