Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Sukhvir S/O Hansraj vs State Of Rajasthan on 2 February, 2021
Author: Inderjeet Singh
Bench: Inderjeet Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 86/2021
Sukhvir S/o Hansraj, R/o Peela Dhaba, P.s. Malakheda, Distt.
Alwar Raj. (At Present Confined In Distt. Jail Alwar Raj.)
----Appellant
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p.
2. Victim, D/o Shri Narsiram, Resident of Kherli Pichnot, P.S.
Malakheda, District Alwar (Raj.)
----Respondents
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Rajneesh Gupta, Adv.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. S.S. Ola, PP For Complainant(s) : Mr. Narendra Prasad Meena, Adv.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJEET SINGH Order 02/02/2021
1. The present criminal appeal under Section 14 (A) (2) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been filed in connection with FIR No.177/2019 registered at Police Station Malakheda, District Alwar for the offence under Sections 363, 366-A, 506 of I.P.C. and 3(2)(va) of SC/ST (POA) Act. (In FIR) and under Sections 363, 366A, 376, 506 of I.P.C. and 3/4 of POCSO Act and Section 3(2)(va) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (In order).
2. Counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant has been falsely implicated in this matter. Counsel further submits that prior to lodging of the present FIR, earlier also the prosecutrix has lodged FIR No.85/2019 against the appellant at Police Station Malakheda, District Alwar in which the Coordinate Bench of this Court considering the allegation levelled against the appellant (Downloaded on 02/02/2021 at 10:24:43 PM) (2 of 3) [CRLAS-86/2021] ordered for release of the appellant on bail vide order dated 26.11.2020 (S.B. Criminal Appeal No.1077/2020) which reads as under:-
"1. Appellant has preferred this appeal aggrieved by order dated 02.06.2020 passed by Special Judge SC/ST Cases POCSO Cases, No.4 Alwar whereby, bail application filed by the appellant under Section 439 Cr.P.C. was rejected.
2. F.I.R. No.85/2019 was registered at Police Station Malakheda, District Alwar for offence under Sections 363, 366-A I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(va) of SC/ST Act.
3. It is contended by counsel for the appellant that the prosecutrix is not turning up to give evidence. Even prior to the COVID Period, summon was sent to her and she did not appear before the Court to depose. It is also contended that prosecutrix is a 17 year old girl. She refused for her medical examination.
4. Learned Public Prosecutor has contended that he has intimated the complainant about filing of the appeal.
5. No one has put in appearance on behalf of the complainant.
6. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the appeal.
7. I have considered the contentions.
8. Considering the contentions put forth by counsel for the appellant, I deem it proper to allow the appeal.
9. The order dated 02.06.2020 is quashed and set aside and the appeal is, accordingly, allowed and it is directed that accused appellant shall be released on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lac only) together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) each to the satisfaction of the trial Court with the stipulation that he shall appear before that Court and any Court to which the matter be transferred, on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so."
Counsel further submits that again the present false FIR has been lodged just to harass the appellant and the appellant is behind the bars since 06.12.2019 and age of the victim is yet to (Downloaded on 02/02/2021 at 10:24:43 PM) (3 of 3) [CRLAS-86/2021] be determined during trial and challan has already been presented in the court and conclusion of trial may take long time.
3. Learned Public Prosecutor assisted by counsel for the complainant has opposed the appeal.
4. Considering the material on record and taking into account the facts and circumstances of the present case and also considering the period of custody and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, it would be just and expedient to order the release of the appellant on bail.
5. The order dated 06.01.2021 passed by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, No.1, Alwar is quashed and set-aside and this appeal is accordingly allowed. Appellant 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 JYOTI /83 (Downloaded on 02/02/2021 at 10:24:43 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)