Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Prakash Chand S/O Sh. Bhinwaram vs State Of Rajasthan (2023/Rjjp/000605) on 27 January, 2023
Author: Inderjeet Singh
Bench: Inderjeet Singh
[2023/RJJP/000605]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Vth Bail Application No. 17646/2022
Prakash Chand S/o Sh. Bhinwaram, Aged About 39 Years, R/o
Village Chainpura, Tehsil Dantaramgarh, Dist. Sikar. ( Accused
Petitioner Presently In Sub Jail Sambhar Lake)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through The Public Prosecutor.
----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kapil Prakash Mathur Mr. Anirudh Tyagi Mr. Dishant Karnawat For Respondent(s) : Mr. Riyasat Ali, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJEET SINGH Order 27/01/2023
1. The present bail application has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. The petitioner has been arrested in connection with FIR No. 232/2020 Registered at Police Station Phulera, District Jaipur for the offence(s) under Sections 366, 379 of IPC and after investigation made out for the offences under Sections 363, 366A, 342, 376 of IPC & Section 3/4 of the POCSO Act.
2. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this matter and according to the statement of victim (PW-1) recorded during trial no allegation of committing rape has been levelled by her against the accused- petitioner. Counsel further submits that it is a case of consensual sex and according to FIR, the age of the victim is about 18 years 6 months and the said FIR has been lodged by the father of the (Downloaded on 02/02/2023 at 12:04:57 AM) [2023/RJJP/000605] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-17646/2022] victim. Counsel further submits that in the BPL Census Form filled in the year 2002 by the complainant-father, the age of the victim has been shown as 1 year when the said form was filled. Counsel further submits that according to the FIR and the BPL Census Form filled by the father of the victim in the year 2002, the age of the victim is above 18 years. Counsel further submits that the final age of the victim is yet to be determined during trial and the petitioner is in custody since 17.11.2020.
3. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application.
4. Considering the material on record and taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the period of custody as well as the statement of the victim (PW-1) recorded during trial and also considering the fact that according to the FIR and the BPL Census Form filled in the year 2002 by the father of the victim, the age of the victim at the time of incident comes to more than 18 years and the final age of the victim is yet to be determined during trial and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this petition is allowed. Petitioner be admitted to regular bail subject to satisfaction of the trial Court. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the concerned trial Court through e-mail/fax, for necessary compliance.
(INDERJEET SINGH),J Upendra Pratap Singh /36 (Downloaded on 02/02/2023 at 12:04:57 AM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)