Allowed

Govind Kumar v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC24 Jan 2024CRLMB/173/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Rajasthan at Jodhpur granted bail to the accused-petitioner, who was面临 charges of abduction, kidnapping, and rape under IPC and POCSO Act, upon a compromise with the victim and quarterly appreciation that the trial would take a long time.

What did the court decide?

Enlargement of the accused-petitioner on bail by furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- and two sureties of Rs. 25,000/- each.

Govind Kumar Vs State of Rajasthan — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JD:3752]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 173/2024

¶4

Govind Kumar S/o Binder Singh, Aged About 26 Years, R/o Ward No. 09, Surewala, Police Station Tibbi, Dist. Hanumangarh (Raj.) (At Present Lodged At Dist. Jail, Hanumangarh)

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

¶8

Sharwan Singh S/o Santa Singh, R/o Ward No. 09, Surewala, Tehsil Tibbi, Dist. Hanumangarh.

¶9

----Respondents

¶10

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr.	Ravinder Kumar
For Respondent(s)	: Mr.	A.R. Choudhary, PP
	Mr.	Sanjeev Beniwal

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI

¶12

Order

¶13

24/01/2024

¶14

The jurisdiction of this Court has been invoked by way of filing an application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. at the instance of accused-petitioner. The requisite details of the matter are

¶15

tabulated herein below:

¶16

S.No.	Particulars of	the Case
1.	FIR Number	260/2023
2.	Concerned Police Station	Tibbi
3.	District	Hanumangarh
4.	Offences alleged in the FIR	Under Section 363 of the IPC
5.	Offences added, if any	Sections 366 and 376 (D)(A) of the IPC and Sections 3/4(2), 5L, G/6 of the POCSO Act
6.	Date of passing of impugn order	ed 27.12.2023

[2024:RJ-JD:3752]

[CRLMB-173/2024]

(2 of 3)

It is contended on behalf of the accused-petitioner that no case for the alleged offences is made out against him and his incarceration is not warranted. There are no factors at play in the case at hand that may work against grant of bail to the accused-petitioner and he has been made an accused based on conjectures and surmises.

¶21

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.

¶22

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the challan papers. There is serious incongruence in between the statements of the victim recorded under Sections 161 and 164 of the Cr.P.C. whereas while examined under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C., she did not level any allegation against the petitioner even in her supplementary statement recorded on 08.08.2023, she levelled allegations against the accused Arun only. However, she made material improvement in her statement recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. while accusing the petitioner also for subjecting her to rape. Besides the serious discrepancy in her statement, it is also stated that the parties have resolved the dispute and entered into compromise. Learned counsel appearing for the victim do not dispute the fact of compromise rather urged to release the petitioner on bail since the victim do not wish to prosecute the petitioner. After investigation, challan papers

(3 of 3)

[2024:RJ-JD:3752]

[CRLMB-173/2024]

have been filed. There is high probability that the trial may take long time to conclude. In light of these facts and circumstances, it is deemed suitable to grant the benefit of bail to the petitioner in the present matter.

¶27

Accordingly, the instant bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the accusedpetitioner 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.

¶28

(FARJAND ALI),J

¶29

103-divya/-

Govind Kumar v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Govind Kumar 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

Mukesh Kumar Vs State of Rajasthan

Dilip Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Mohar Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Deen Dayal Sharma Vs State of Rajasthan

Bhanwar Lal Vs State of Rajasthan

Purkha Ram Vs State of Rajasthan