Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Fakir Chand S/O Prabhati Lal B/C Swami vs State Of Rajasthan on 21 July, 2020
Author: Inderjeet Singh
Bench: Inderjeet Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Bail Cancellation Application No. 12/2019
1. Fakir Chand S/o Prabhati Lal, Aged About 50 Years, R/o
Village Dhish Tehsil Behror, Distt. Alwar Raj.
---Complainant/Petitioner
2. Sharmila @ Pooja Minor D/o Fakir Chand, Aged About 14
Years, R/o Village Dhish Tehsil Behror, Distt. Alwar Raj.
Through Her Natural Father And Guardian Fakirchand.
----Victim/Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p.
2. Sushil Kumar S/o Ram Singh, R/o Village Dhish Tehsil
Behror Distt. Alwar Raj.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. V.K. Sharma.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. S.S. Ola, P.P.
For Respondent(s) Mr. V.P. Yadav.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJEET SINGH
Order
21/07/2020
The present application has been filed by the complainant
seeking cancellation of bail granted by this court to accused-
respondent no.2 under section 439 Cr.P.C. vide order dated
04.06.2018 in S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail No.7073/2018 in reference
to FIR No.852/2017 Registered at Police Station Behror, District
Alwar for the offence under Sections 363, 342 & 376 of IPC and
Section 3/4 of Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act.
Counsel for the complainant-petitioner submitted that after
granting bail to the accused-respondent No.2, he is regularly
harassing the victim. Counsel further submits that father of the
(Downloaded on 24/07/2020 at 09:21:05 PM)
(2 of 2) [CRLBC-12/2019]
victim has also lodged a complaint through police before the Sub
Divisional Magistrate, Behror District Alwar under Section 107 &
116 of Cr.P.C.
Counsel appearing on behalf of the accused-respondent no.2
has opposed the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner
and submitted that the bail application filed on behalf of the accused-respondent no.2 was allowed by this court on merits. Counsel further submits that the statement of the victim has not been recorded in the proceedings initiated under Section 107 & 116 of Cr.P.C. Counsel further submits that no FIR has been lodged by the victim against the accused-respondent no.2 after granting of bail by this court vide order dated 04.06.2018 and prayed for dismissal of the bail cancellation application.
Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail cancellation application.
Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record The bail application filed on behalf of the accused-respondent no.2 was duly considered and this court vide order dated 04.06.2018 allowed the bail application on merit. This bail cancellation application is further liable to be dismissed as no FIR has been lodged against the accused-respondent no.2 after granting him bail by this court.
In that view of the matter, this bail cancellation application stands dismissed.
(INDERJEET SINGH),J MG/01 (Downloaded on 24/07/2020 at 09:21:05 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)