Allowed

Mo. Najim S/O Shri Gulam Rasool Mohammad v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC6 Sept 2023CRLMB/9175/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This bail application was allowed in a case involving alleged offences under IPC 363, IPC 376, and POCSO. The court granted bail considering the relationship between the parties and the period in custody, without expressing an opinion on the merits of the case.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner enlarged on bail by furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- and two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each.

Mo. Najim S/O Shri Gulam Rasool Mohammad Vs… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

[2023:RJ-JP:21261]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 9175/2023

¶4

Mo. Najim S/o Shri Gulam Rasool Mohammad, Aged About 19 Years, R/o Village Dheepara, Police Station Talgram, District Kannoj, Uttar Pradesh, Presently R/o Kachchhi Basti, Police Station Bhatta Basti, Jaipur. (At Present Confined In Central Jail Jaipur)

¶5

		Versus	----Petitioner
State Of Rajasthan,	Thro	ugh PP	----Respondent
For Petitioner(s)	:	Mr. Mohammad Aslam
For Respondent(s)	:	Mr. Riyasat Ali, PP
For Complainant(s)	:	Mr. Javed Mohd. Khan Mr. Riyaz Ahmad

¶6

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN

¶7

Order

¶8

06/09/2023

¶9

Petitioner has filed this bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.

¶10

F.I.R. No.78/2023 was registered at Police Station Shastri Nagar, District Jaipur City (North) for offence under Section 363 of IPC. Later on, police filed charge-sheet for offences under 363, 376, 376(2)(n) & 506 of IPC and Sections 3/4 & 5(L)/6 of POCSO Act.

¶11

It is submitted by counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that petitioner, who is aged about 19 years and prosecutrix, who is

(2 of 3)

[2023:RJ-JP:21261]

[CRLMB-9175/2023]

aged about 17 years, were in relationship. Prosecutrix left her parental home on her own by leaving a letter which is evident from FIR itself. It was mentioned in the letter that the prosecutrix intended to marry with the petitioner and she developed physical relations with the petitioner on her own which is evident from the tenor of her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. Petitioner is in custody since 07.05.2023. Charge-sheet has been filed and trial is likely to consume time.

¶16

Learned Public Prosecutor assisted by learned counsel for the complainant has opposed the bail application and submits that there is allegation against the petitioner of commission of rape with the prosecutrix and consent of the prosecutrix is immaterial as she was minor at the time of incident.

¶17

I have considered the contentions.

¶18

Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances; considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for both the parties, period of custody and the fact that there were relations between the petitioner and prosecutrix, but without expressing any opinion on merits/demerits of this case, this Court deems it just and proper to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

¶19

This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused petitioner- Mo. Najim S/o Shri Gulam Rasool Mohammad, shall be released on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000/(Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court with the stipulation that he shall appear

[2023:RJ-JP:21261]

[CRLMB-9175/2023]

(3 of 3)

before that Court and any court to which the matter is transferred,

¶24

on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to

¶25

do so.

¶26

(ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J

¶27

CHARU SONI /121

Mo. Najim S/O Shri Gulam Rasool Mohammad v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mo. Najim S/O Shri Gulam Rasool Mohammad 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

Mohanlal Meena Son of Rambabu Meena, Vs State of Rajasthan

Dinesh Kumar S/O Ramswaroop Vs State of Rajasthan

Santosh Kumar Prajapat S/O Shri Vishram Prajapat Vs the State of Rajasthan

Banvari S/O Shri Prem Singh, Vs State of Rajasthan

Manoj Chirania S/O Shri Madan Lal, Vs State of Rajasthan

Shakil Khan S/O Shri Gaffar, Vs State of Rajasthan