Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Krishan Kumar Son Of Shri Bhagirath Mal vs State Of Rajasthan on 6 January, 2022
Author: Chandra Kumar Songara
Bench: Chandra Kumar Songara
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 2nd Bail Application No. 20586/2021
Krishan Kumar Son Of Shri Bhagirath Mal, Aged About 32 Years,
Resident Of Mojucourt Lalana, Police Station Pragpura, Jaipur,
Rajasthan At Present House No. D-86-87, Murlipura Scheme,
Jaipur (At Present In Central Jail, Jaipur. ----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p. ----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Prathishtha Sunger, Advocate
(through video conferencing)
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Riyasat Ali, Public Prosecutor
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA KUMAR SONGARA Order 06/01/2022 This 2nd bail application has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in connection with FIR No. 512/2019 registered at Police Station Murlipura Jaipur (Raj.) for the offence under Section 376 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2005.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is behind the bars since long and after completion of the investigation, charge-sheet has been filed. Learned counsel further submits that in the medical examination of the prosecution, no injury or abrasions were found on her body and private parts. In this case, learned trial court recorded the statement of the complainant along with other material witnesses and no offence as alleged has been proved against the petitioner. Learned counsel further submits that ossification test was conducted by the prosecution, under which she was found to be between 16 to 18 years of age at the time of alleged incident. Learned counsel (Downloaded on 24/12/2022 at 08:55:02 AM) (2 of 2) [CRLMB-20586/2021] further submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case and there were serious contradictions in the statement of the prosecutrix. Prosecutrix has been examined in the learned trial court as PW-4, recorded on page 06 of the camera trial that "eEeh us dksVZ esa c;ku nsus ds fy, ,d IykV vkSj :- 50]000@& dh ekax dh FkhA". Learned counsel also submits that the petitioner is young boy of 30 years of age and he is in custody since 18.08.2019. Hence, the accused- petitioner may be released on bail.
Learned Public Prosecutor has strongly opposed the bail application.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.
First bail application of the petitioner was dismissed by this Court as withdrawn vide order dated 05.10.2020. As per FIR, victim is 14 years of age. During trial, victim is examined as PW-4 and her mother is as PW-1. Both are not a hostile witness. Medical examination report of the victim is Ex-P5. Opinion regarding sexual intercourse will be given after FSL report. Other witnesses were examined during trial as PW-2, PW-3 and PW-5 are also not a hostile witnesses. Therefore, looking to the above facts and circumstances and gravity of the offence; but without expressing any opinion on the merits/demerits of the case, this court deems it not proper to release the petitioner on bail.
Accordingly, the 2nd bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is dismissed.
(CHANDRA KUMAR SONGARA),J Ashish Kumar /20 (Downloaded on 24/12/2022 at 08:55:02 AM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)