Allowed

Shahid Son of Shri Ayub v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC23 May 2023CRLMB/2959/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application allowed to petitioner Shahid Son of Shri Ayub who is under judicial custody. Court deemed it appropriate to grant bail as prosecution witnesses turned hostile and trial conclusion is uncertain, without commenting on case merits. Petitioner directed to furnish bonds.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner granted bail on personal bond of Rs.50,000/- and two surety bonds of Rs.25,000/- each.

Shahid Son of Shri Ayub Vs State of Rajasthan — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

[2023/RJJP/011563]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 2959/2023

¶4

Shahid Son Of Shri Ayub, Resident Of Khedli Gumani Police Station Jurhera District Bharatpur. At Present in Central Jail Bharatpur)

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P.

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. Hemang Singh Mr. Arslaan Khan
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Chandragupt Chopra-PP
For Complainant(s)	Mr. Ankit Khandelwal

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND

¶11

Order

¶12

23/05/2023

¶13

This bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner in connection with FIR No.140/2020 registered at Police Station Jurhera, District Bharatpur wherein he is charged for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 341, 376-D of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the POCSO Act.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that during the course of trial, statements of victim “M” and the complainant PW2Sabir have been recorded and they have not supported the version of the prosecution and they have been declared as hostile. Counsel submits that petitioner is in judicial custody since the date of his arrest and conclusion of the trial will take its own time, so indulgence of bail be granted to him.

[2023/RJJP/011563]

[CRLMB-2959/2023]

(2 of 2)

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor as well as counsel for the complainant have opposed the bail application.

¶19

Considering the arguments put forward by the learned counsel for the petitioner and looking to the fact that PW-1-victim “M” and the complainant PW2- Sabir have turned hostile and they have not supported the version of the prosecution and trial will take its own time to conclude but without commenting any opinion on merits or demerits of the case, I deem it just and appropriate to grant indulgence of bail to the petitioner under Section 439 Cr.P.C.

¶20

Accordingly, the bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that accused-petitioner- Shahid Son of Shri Ayub arrested in connection with the aforementioned FIR, may be released on bail; provided he furnishes a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two surety bonds of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of learned trial Court with the stipulation to appear before that Court on all dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.

¶21

(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J

¶22

Ashu/14

Shahid Son of Shri Ayub v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shahid Son of Shri Ayub 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

Saint Meera Brotherhood Society Vs Raj.Non Govt.Edu.Institution Tribunal

Narottam Lal Vs Judge Labour Court and Anr.

Saudan Singh Son of Shri Ramjill Vs Assistant Engineer

Lekhraj S/O Shri Gomda Vs State of Rajasthan

Lekhraj S/O Gomda Vs the State of Rajasthan

Raj Rajya Sahkari Upbhokta Vs Labour Court No 2 and Anr.