Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH
Pankaj Bhandari, J.
Irfaan - Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan - Respondent
Criminal Miscellaneous Third Bail Application No. 2242 of 2021
Decided on : 04-03-2021
Bail Application - Allegations of Rape and POCSO Act - The court dismissed the third bail application considering the allegations of rape and POCSO Act against the petitioner.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner filed a third bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for offences under Sections 354(A) & 354(B) I.P.C., Sections 7, 8, 11, 12 of POCSO Act, and Section 67b of I.T. Act. The petitioner contended that the prosecutrix changed her statement and raised inconsistencies in her statements.
Finding of the Court:
The court analyzed the contentions of the petitioner and the State. The court found that the prosecutrix, who was a child at the time of the offence, had leveled allegations of rape against the petitioner in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. The court concluded that it was not inclined to entertain the third bail application and dismissed it.
Issues: Allegations of changing statements, inconsistencies in prosecutrix's statements, and opposition by the State.
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the allegations of rape and POCSO Act against the petitioner, the contentions of the State, and the age of the prosecutrix at the time of the offence in reaching its decision to dismiss the bail application.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the third bail application.
JUDGMENT
Pankaj Bhandari, J. - Petitioner has filed this third bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C.
2. F.I.R. No.536/2019 was registered at Police Station Sadar Hindon Dist. Karauli for offence under Sections 354(A) & 354(B) I.P.C. and Sections 7, 8, 11, 12 of POCSO Act and Section 67b of I.T. Act.
3. It is contended by counsel for the petitioner that prosecutrix is changing her statement. Statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. has infirmity with the statement recorded before the Court. It is also contended that in the statement recorded before the Court, prosecutrix has alleged that she was raped on two occasions, this fact is not raised in the statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. It is further contended that co-accused against whom there was allegation of recording, has not been made an accused in this case. It is also contended that the year of occurrence has also been changed by the prosecutrix. At the time when statement was recorded, she was major.
4. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the third bail application. It is contended that prosecutrix was a child at the time when the offence was committed and in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., she has levelled allegation with regard to rape against the petitioner.
5. I have considered the contentions.
6. Considering the contentions put forth by counsel for the State, I am not inclined to entertain the third bail application.
7. This third bail application is, accordingly, dismissed.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
