Allowed

Ganesh Sharma v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC15 Jan 2024CRLMB/145/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed the second bail application of an accused charged under IPC and POCSO Acts. The Court noted discrepancies in the victim's age document and testimony of parents suggesting she may be a major. Concluding that the case involved elopement and the trial would be lengthy, bail was granted with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Accused enlarged on bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties of Rs. 25,000 each.

Ganesh Sharma Vs State of Rajasthan — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JD:2148]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 2^nd Bail Application No. 145/2024

¶4

Ganesh Singh S/o Naina Singh, Aged About 26 Years, R/o Baggad Vanni P.s Devgarh , District Rajsamand (Presently Lodged In Disitrict Jail, Rajsamand)

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

1.	State Of Rajasthan,Through Pp
2.	Devi Singh S/o Govind Singh, R/o Baggad Vanni P.s Devgarh,District Rajsamand

¶8

----Respondents

¶9

For Petitioner(s)	: Ms.Shobha Prabhakar
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Gaurav Singh,PP

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI

¶11

Order

¶12

15/01/2024

¶13

The jurisdiction of this court has been invoked by way of filing the second bail application under Section 439 CrPC at the instance of accused-petitioner. The requisite details of the matter

¶14

are tabulated herein below:

¶15

S.No.	Particulars of	the Case
1.	FIR Number	50/2022
2.	Concerned Police Station	Devgarh
3.	District	Rajsamand
4.	Offences alleged in the FIR	Section 363 of the IPC
5.	Offences added, if any	Sections 366-A, 376(2) (n), 376(3), 344 of the IPC and Sections 5(l) & 6 of the POCSO Act
6.	Date of passing of first bail application	16.08.2023

¶16

None present for the respondent No.2. While disposing of the first bail application, the petitioner was allowed to renew the prayer after the statement of the victim is recorded in the trial.

(2 of 4)

[2024:RJ-JD:2148]

[CRLMB-145/2024]

Now, the victim and her parents have been examined by the trial Court thus, the second bail application.

¶21

Learned Public Prosecutor submits that the complainant/victim of the case has been intimated regarding hearing of the bail plea. However, no one has turned up on his behalf.

¶22

Ms. Shobha Prabhakar, learned counsel representing the petitioner fervently submits that totally a false case has been foisted against the petitioner under the pressure of the victim’s parents; victim and petitioner were having love affair and they eloped accordingly. She drew the attention of this Court to show the clandestine manner in which the girl/victim left her parents company and joined the association of the petitioner; on different time, dates and places, the victim stayed and visited with the petitioner and had used various means of transport including the public transport and reached to a destination just to live a happy married life. As far as the question of age of the girl/victim is concerned, Ms. Prabhakar would submit that the document submitted by the prosecution is not a sacrosanct piece of evidence rather the same seems to be dubious in view of the admissions made by the parents in cross examination. She drew the attention of this Court towards the statement of the father of the victim wherein he admits that he was of 50 years of age and he has three children and all took birth in a regular interval of 3-4 years and he got marriage at the age of 22 years. The mother of the victim nods with the suggestion of the defence and stated that she delivered three children in an interval of one and half year after

[2024:RJ-JD:2148]

[CRLMB-145/2024]

(3 of 4)

her marriage. The scholar register and admission form tendered into evidence reflects that the girl/victim got admission in U.KG standard and at the time for proving her date of birth, the transfer certificate of previous school was annexed with the application. A perusal of the transfer certificate reflecting that the father’s name of the girl/victim in that certificate was mentioned different. In this view of the matter, the learned counsel submits that prima facie there is ample material available on record to suggest that it was a case of elopement and a consensual sexual relationship between two majors, therefore, no offence under the POCSO Act is made out. She further submits that now the material witnesses viz., victim and her parents have been examined but trial would still take a long time to reach at a legitimate conclusion thus, keeping the petitioner behind the bars would not be justifiable as there remains no apprehension of hampering or tampering the prosecution witnesses.

¶27

Contrary to the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Public Prosecutor opposes the bail application and submits that the present case is not fit for enlargement of accused on bail.

¶28

I have pondered over the submissions made at bar by the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Public Prosecutor for the State and minutely scanned the certified copies made available to this Court. There is a substance in the submission that the elopement of the girl/victim was willful and prima facie it can be said that she was not coerced to join the company of the petitioner. The serious discrepancy with regard to

[2024:RJ-JD:2148]

[CRLMB-145/2024]

(4 of 4)

date of birth of the victim creating a grave cloud of doubt to the fact that the victim/girl was below the age of 18 years at the relevant point of time. The change of father’s name in previous transfer certificate casting a further doubt in the genuineness of the document. When the question regarding age of the girl arises, foremost point of consideration should be the testimony of her parents and it should give preference over the documentary evidence. The bare perusal of the statements of mother and father of the victim giving strength to the submission of the defence that the victim/girl was not below the age of 18 years at the time of incident. Be that as it may, no final conclusion is being given as the same may put a serious dent in the case of the prosecution. However, looking to the fact that there is high probability that the trial may take long time to conclude thus, in light of these facts and circumstances, it is deemed suitable to grant the benefit of bail to the petitioner in the present matter.

¶33

Accordingly, the instant 2^nd bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the accused-petitioner as named in the cause title shall be enlarged on bail provided he 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 his appearance before the court concerned on all the dates of hearing as and when called upon to do so.

¶34

(FARJAND ALI),J

¶35

33-Mamta/-

Ganesh Sharma v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ganesh Sharma 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

Piyush Vs State of Rajasthan

Parmanand @ Pawan Vs State of Rajasthan

Bhupendra @ Bhavesh @ Bhura Vs State of Rajasthan

Teja Ram Vs Union of India

Rohitash Vs State of Rajasthan

Harish Vs State of Rajasthan