Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Irsad S/O Shabbir vs State Of Rajasthan on 3 September, 2021
Author: Mahendar Kumar Goyal
Bench: Mahendar Kumar Goyal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 11214/2021
Irsad S/o Shabbir, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Jodhpur Ka Vas
(Samsalka) PS Pahari Dist. Bharatpur Raj.
----Accused/Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through PP
----Non-Petitioner
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ravindra Paliwal for
Mr. Ankit Khandelwal
For Respondent(s) : Mr. F.R. Meena, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL
Order
03/09/2021
This application for anticipatory bail has been filed by the
petitioner apprehending his arrest in connection with F.I.R. No.
144/2016 registered at Police Station Sikri, District Bharatpur for
the offence(s) under Section(s) 366 & 363 IPC and later on for the
offence under Sections 363, 336 & 376-D of IPC and Section 3/4
of POCSO Act.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he has
falsely been implicated in this case. Drawing attention of this
Court towards the Court statement of prosecutrix recorded in trial
against the co-accused, learned counsel submitted that therein
she has not supported the prosecution story and has been
declared hostile. He, therefore, prayed for benefit of pre-arrest
bail for the petitioner.
(Downloaded on 03/09/2021 at 10:36:51 PM)
(2 of 2) [CRLMB-11214/2021]
Opposing the bail application, learned Public Prosecutor
submitted that supplementary charge-sheet dated 26.07.2017 has been filed against the petitioner under Sections 299 CrPC under the provisions of 363, 366 & 376-D of I.P.C and Section 3/4 of POCSO Act. He submitted that the prosecutrix has levelled specific allegation against the petitioner of subjecting her to rape in her statement recorded under Section 164 CrPC. Learned Public Prosecutor further submitted that the petitioner is yet to be put to trial and statement of a witness in trial against the co-accused cannot be relied upon by the petitioner to avail the benefit of pre- arrest bail. He submitted that even otherwise also, to the extent of her kidnapping, the prosecutrix has levelled specific allegation in her examination-in-chief. He, therefore, prayed for rejection of the bail application.
Taking into consideration the contentions advanced by learned counsels for the respective parties, the nature and gravity of allegation against the petitioner especially the statement of the prosecutrix recorded under Section 164 CrPC, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner benefit of pre-arrest bail.
Resultantly, the bail application is dismissed.
(MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL),J PRAGATI/22 (Downloaded on 03/09/2021 at 10:36:51 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)