Allowed

Anil Kumar Bhagwat S/O Shri Hari Singh v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC21 Aug 2023CRLMB/1428/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Rajasthan allowed an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in a rape case. The court relied on communication records and money transfers indicating a consensual relationship within the specific family context to rule out grave miscarriage of justice probability.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted; petitioner to surrender and furnish bond of Rs. 25,000 with two sureties.

Anil Kumar Bhagwat S/O Shri Hari Singh Vs… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 1428/2023

¶3

Anil Kumar Bhagwat S/o Shri Hari Singh, Aged About 52 Years, R/o A-201, Railway Colony Flats, Gator, Jagatpura Railway Station, Jagatpura Jaipur ( Rajasthan)

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p

¶7

----Respondent

¶8

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Chandra Shekhar For Respondent(s) : Mr. Atul Sharma, PP Mr. Manish Gupta

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR

¶10

Order

¶11

21/08/2023

¶12

The petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with FIR No. 52/2023 registered at police station Pratap Nagar, Jaipur City (East) for offence under Section 376 (2) (n) of IPC.

¶13

According to FIR, the informant a girl aged about 20 years was induced by the petitioner to go with the petitioner to get some medicines for the mother of the informant. The incident took place in April/May 2022. The petitioner allegedly served some stupefying substance in the cold drink and the informant became unconscious, she found herself in a room of a hotel. Thereafter, the petitioner showed some videos of the informant to the informant and threatened to make her videos viral on social media and allegedly ravished her. Thereafter, the petitioner used to ravish her on subsequent occasions also by putting her under the threat of making her videos viral. The aforesaid fact has been

¶14

[CRLMB-1428/2023]

¶15

(2 of 3)

¶16

supported by the victim in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C also.

¶17

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in fact it is a case of consensual relationship as the calls and chats between the two dated 06.01.2023 at page-30 of the brief would show that the victim is asking the petitioner to transfer money on “phone-pe”. The petitioner stated that he has got no phone-pe, he can transfer the money on paytm. Thereafter, the victim stated that she has no paytm therefore, money should come on phone-pe. Learned counsel further submits that the entire material has been placed before the police but the police is not investigating these issues as well as on the issue of transfer of money to the bank account of the victim subsequent to the alleged date of incident. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner was talking with Kiran, who was bhabhi of the victim. The call details would show cordial relations between the two families even in January, 2023. Learned counsel submits that on 06.01.2023, he had transferred Rs. 6,000/- to the victim on request of victim herself.

¶18

Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the prayer of bail. 5. Learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for bail on the ground that statement of the victim recorded before the Magistrate cannot be disbelieved only for production of certain material, genuineness whereof the victim disputes.

¶19

Considering the nature of material available on the record, especially, the talk between the petitioner and victim and transfer of money by the petitioner in the account of the victim in January, 2023, chances of consensual relationship cannot be completely

¶20

[CRLMB-1428/2023]

¶21

(3 of 3)

¶22

ruled out, hence, the instant anticipatory bail application stands allowed.

¶23

It is directed that in the event of arrest or surrender within two weeks, the petitioner above-named shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- with two sureties of like amount on following conditions:-

¶24

(1) that the petitioner shall fully cooperate with the investigation/trial of the case,

¶25

(ii) that the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or any police officer, and

¶26

(iii) that the petitioner shall not leave India without prior permission of the court.

¶27

(BIRENDRA KUMAR),J

¶28

ashu /226

Anil Kumar Bhagwat S/O Shri Hari Singh v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anil Kumar Bhagwat S/O Shri Hari Singh 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nahar Singh S/O Shri Gardhari Lal Choudhary Vs State of Rajasthan

Ghanshyam Yadav Vs State of Rajasthan and Anr.

Jagdish Prasad Meena S/O Chimman Lal Meena Vs State of Rajasthan

Marjeena W/O Mohamad Tanveer Vs State of Rajasthan

Sanjeev Khokha S/O Late R.K. Khokha Vs State of Rajasthan

Varsha D/O Shri Ajay Veer Singh, Vs State of Rajasthan