Dismissed

Ganpat @ Ganpatlal v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC1 Aug 2023CRLMB/2154/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Honourable Court rejected bail application of accused arrested under sexual offence IPC sections, holding statements of prosecutrix not yet recorded making it unfit for bail grant, with direction to trial court to record statements on priority basis.

What did the court decide?

Application for bail rejected; liberty to file fresh application after investigation completed; trial court directed to record prosecutrix statements on priority.

Ganpat @ Ganpatlal Vs State of Rajasthan — Bail and Remand | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 2154/2023

¶3

Ganpat @ Ganpatlal S/o Baburam, Aged About 64 Years, R/o Kalyanpura Biratiyan Khurd, Police Station Baar, District Pali (Raj.) (At Present Lodged In Sub Jail, Pali)

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶7

----Respondent

¶8

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. Gajendra Panwar
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Arun Kumar,PP

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MADAN GOPAL VYAS

¶10

Order

¶11

01/08/2023

¶12

The petitioner has been arrested in connection with FIR No.15/2023 of Police Station Bar, District Pali for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 354, 354A, 376 & 506 of IPC. He has preferred this bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. It is submitted that there is a land dispute between the parties. It is further submitted that in the statements of the prosecutrix recorded under Section 161 & 164 Cr.P.C. of prosecutrix there are several contradictions and on the date of incident, the victim was a major. Charge-sheet of the case has already been filed. It is submitted that the petitioner is behind bars since long, therefore, it is prayed that the accused-petitioner may be granted bail.

¶13

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that as per the injury report, there are injuries

¶14

[CRLMB-2154/2023]

¶15

(2 of 2)

¶16

on the body of the victim which prima facie shows that the offences alleged against the petitioner have been committed by him. It is further submitted that the statements of the victim are yet to be recorded before the learned trial Court. Therefore, the petitioner may not be granted indulgence of bail.

¶17

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

¶18

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the fact that statements of the prosecutrix have not yet been recorded before the learned trial Court, without commenting on merits and demerits of the case, this Court does not find it to be a fit case for grant of bail to the petitioner.

¶19

Consequently the present bail application is rejected with liberty to file fresh bail application after recording of statements of prosecutrix before learned trial Court.

¶20

However, learned trial Court is directed to record the statements of prosecutrix on priority basis.

¶21

Copy of this order be sent to the learned trial Court through E-mail or Fax.

¶22

(MADAN GOPAL VYAS),J

¶23

27-nidhi/-

Ganpat @ Ganpatlal v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ganpat @ Ganpatlal 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Suresh Kumar Vs State of Rajasthan

Vinod Khan Vs State of Rajasthan

Nikhil Khant Vs State of Rajasthan

Narpat Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Jasraj Vs State of Rajasthan

Prabhat @ Lucky Gehlot Vs State of Rajasthan