High Court allowed bail to Sunil Khodiwal charged under IPC and POCSO sections. Court applied principles of bail grant, emphasizing long trial duration and lack of findings against petitioner at this stage.
Petitioner released on bail with personal bond of Rs.50,000 and two sureties of Rs.25,000 each.
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/RJJD/017445]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 6048/2023
Sunil Khodiwal S/o Bhairaram, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Bhed Tehsil Osia Ps Lohawat Dist. Jodhpur Presently Makan No. 56 Gulabnagar Ps Mahamandir Jodhpur.
(At Present Lodged In Central Jail Jodhpur)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P.
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Gopal Ram. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mahipal Bishnoi, P.P.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR
Order
25/05/2023
This application for bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner who has been arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.217/2023, registered at Police Station Mahamandir, District Jodhpur City (East), for offences under Sections 341, 323, 427, 502(2) of the IPC, Sections 11/12, 16/17 of the POCSO Act and Sections 75 & 87 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is exactly similar to that of coaccused Suresh Parihar, Manohar Bhati, Arvind @ Sethu, Abhishek, Rajesh and Vijay Kumar, who have already been
[2023/RJJD/017445]
[CRLMB-6048/2023]
(2 of 4)
enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 18.05.2023 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.5079/2023. Therefore, the petitioner also deserves similar indulgence by this Court.
The petitioner is in judicial custody and the trial of the case will take sufficiently long time, therefore, the benefit of bail should be granted to the accused-petitioner.
For ready reference, the order dated 18.05.2023 is reproduced herein below:-
“This application for bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioners who have been arrested in connection with FIR No.217/2023 registered at Police Station Mahamandir, District Jodhpur City (East), for offences under Sections 341, 323, 427, 505(2) of IPC and Section 11/12, 16/17 of POCSO Act and Sections 75 and 87 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the complainant. Perused the material available on record.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned counsel submitted that the allegation against the petitioners is that they assaulted minor brother of the complainant and forcibly stripped off his clothes.
This Court vide order dated 17.5.2023 directed learned Public Prosecutor to keep the investigating officer present before the Court alongwith case diary.
After perusing the case diary, this Court prima-facie finds that the petitioners did not play
(3 of 4)
[2023/RJJD/017445]
[CRLMB-6048/2023]
any active role in stripping off the clothes worn by minor brother of the complainant, though they were part of the mob, which forced him to take a round of the Krishi Mandi where the incident took place. This Court also finds that the victim in his statement dated 26.4.2023 recorded before the court of MMCT Jodhpur Metro so also in his information dated 20.4.2023 provided to the Police, did not name present petitioners.
Having considered the rival submissions, facts and circumstances of the case, so also the fact that prima-facie, this Court does not find any role of the petitioners in stripping off the clothes of the victim; challan has been filed and the trial of the case will take sufficiently long time, this Court is of the opinion that the bail application filed by the petitioners deserves to be accepted.
It is however, made clear that findings recorded/observations made above are for limited purposes of adjudication of bail application. The trial court shall not get prejudiced by the same.
Accordingly, the bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the accused-petitioners- (i) Suresh Parihar S/o Shri Dedaram, (ii) Manohar Bhati S/o Shri Om Prakash Ji, (iii) Arvind @ Sethu S/o Shri Gyan Singh Ji, (iv) Abhishek S/o Shri Braham Singh, (v) Rajesh Kumar S/o Shri Tulsi Ram and (vi) Vijay Kumar S/o Shri Sachchanand shall be enlarged on bail in connection with FIR No.217/2023 registered at Police Station Mahamandir, District Jodhpur City (East), provided each of them furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for their appearance
(4 of 4)
[2023/RJJD/017445]
[CRLMB-6048/2023]
before the court concerned on all the dates of hearing as and when called upon to so.”
Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application.
Having considered the rival submissions, facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merits/demerits of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the bail application filed by the petitioner deserves to be accepted.
Consequently, the bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed. It is ordered that the accused-petitioner Sunil Khodiwal S/o Bhairaram arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.217/2023, registered at Police Station Mahamandir, District Jodhpur City (East), shall be released on bail, if not wanted in any other case, provided he furnishes a personal bond of Rs.50,000/and two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each, to the satisfaction of learned trial court, for his appearance before that court on each & every date of hearing and whenever called upon to do so till completion of the trial.
(KULDEEP MATHUR),J
205-Prashant/-
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner Sunil Khodiwal should be released on bail in the given FIR.
Whether the petitioner deserves similar indulgence granted to co-accused in a similar bail application.
4 provisions across 4 enactments
Sunil Khodiwal
State Of Rajasthan
KULDEEP MATHUR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
