SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1989 Supreme(Raj) 652

RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Farooq Hasan, J.
Pooranmal - Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan - Respondent
S.B. Cr. Misc. Bail Application No. 1096 of 1989.
Decided On : 28-04-1989

Advocates:
For the Petitioner:O.S. Lakhawat, Advocate.
For the Respondent: R.K. Bhargava, P.P.

The court's decision was based on the absence of a positive opinion of rape in the medical report and the circumstances of the case, leading to the grant of bail to the petitioner.

Headnote:

Rape - Bail Application - Medical Report - Hymen Intact - Section 376/511, Indian Penal Code - Bail granted

Fact of the Case:

The accused filed a bail application contending that there was no penetration and the medical report indicated the girl's hymen was intact.

Finding of the Court:

The court considered the contentions of both parties and the medical report, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, granted bail to the petitioner.

Issues: The issue revolved around whether the accused committed the offence of rape under Section 376/511, Indian Penal Code, considering the medical report and the statement of the victim.

Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the absence of a positive opinion of rape in the medical report and the circumstances of the case, leading to the grant of bail to the petitioner.

Final Decision: Bail was granted to the petitioner on the condition of furnishing a personal bond and sureties.

JUDGMENT

1. - Heard and perused papers for the case diary.

2. Mr. Lakhawat contended that this is not a case where it can be said that the penetration was there; and that as per-medical report, the hymen of the girl was intact. In these circumstances, according to Mr. Lakhawat, it cannot be said that the offence of rape has been committed by the accused petitioner.

3. Learned Public Prosecutor on the other hand, opposed this application and contended that in view of the statement of Kumari Setti, it can very well be said that an attempt was made by the petitioner and thereby the petitioner committed the offence under Section 376/511, Indian Penal Code.

4. I have considered the points raised by both the learned Counsel; and the report of the medical jurist wherein there is no positive opinion of rape. How ever, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to accept this bail petition The petitioner, is ordered to be released on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of L 10,000/- (Ten thousand) together with two sureties each in the sum of L 5000/- to the satisfaction of trial court with the stipulation to appear in that court as and when called upon to do so during the pendency of the trial against him in this case.Bail granted.

*******


Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top