Allowed

Rakesh v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC8 Feb 2024CRLMB/326/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Rajasthan High Court granted bail to the petitioner under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in a case alleging Section 376 IPC rape. The court noted the delay in the FIR and a consensual relationship but allowed bail with a personal bond due to the expected long trial duration.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted on a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties of Rs. 25,000 each to the satisfaction of the trial Judge.

Rakesh Vs State of Rajasthan — Bail and Remand | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JD:6685]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 326/2024

¶4

Rakesh S/o Nathu Ram, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Bera Chhota Mana Chawandia Kallan, Police Station Jaitaran, Dist. Beawar (Raj.) (Presently Lodged In Sub Jail, Jaitaran)

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr.	Awar Dan Ujjwal
For Respondent(s)	: Mr.	A.R. Choudhary,PP

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI

¶11

Order

¶12

08/02/2024

¶13

The jurisdiction of this Court has been invoked by way of filing

¶14

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	441/2023
2.	Concerned Police Station	Jaitaran
3.	District	Pali
4.	Offences alleged in the FIR	Under Section 376 (2) (N) of the IPC
5.	Offences added,if any	--
6.	Date of passing of impugned order	16.12.2023

¶17

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

(2 of 3)

[2024:RJ-JD:6685]

[CRLMB-326/2024]

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.

¶22

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.

¶23

I have considered the submissions made by both the parties and have perused the material available on record. There is a delay in lodging the FIR and no satisfactory explanation has been furnished in this regard. The victim is a major girl. She used to meet the petitioner surreptitiously and established physical relationship on several occasions. The FIR has been lodged on 30.08.2023. The submission of the defence cannot be ignored that the relation between them were consensual. Be that as it may, this Court would abstain from making any observation in this regard but taking into account the fact that there is high probability that the trial may take long time to conclude; it is deemed suitable to grant the benefit of bail to the petitioner in the present matter.

¶24

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

¶25

(3 of 3) [CRLMB-326/2024]

¶26

[2024:RJ-JD:6685]

¶27

before the court concerned on all the dates of hearing as and

¶28

when called upon to do so.

¶29

(FARJAND ALI),J

¶30

66-Ashutosh/-

Rakesh v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rakesh 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

Tahir Malavat Vs State of Rajasthan

Ranveer Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Rajesh Kumar Vs State of Rajasthan

Chandu Luhar @ Chandiya Vs State of Rajasthan

Junjaram Vs State of Rajasthan

Harshit Khatri Vs State of Rajasthan