HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
Vinit Kumar Mathur, J.
Aasif Mohammad – Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan & Ors. – Respondents
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 147 of 2022
Decided On : 03-02-2022
Bail Application - Offences under IPC, POCSO Act, and SC/ST Act - Court denies bail based on gravity of the offence and statement of the victim
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner filed a bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in connection with offences under Sections 447 & 354 of the IPC, Section 7/8 of POCSO act, 2012, and Sections 3(1)(W), 3(2) (Va) of SC/ST act, 1989.
Finding of the Court:
The court, after considering the statements of the victim recorded before the trial court, the nature of the accusation, and the gravity of the offence, denied bail to the petitioner under Section 439 Cr.P.C.
Issues: The main issue was whether the petitioner should be granted bail considering the nature of the accusation and the statement of the victim.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the gravity of the offence, the victim's statement, and the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the bail application at this stage.
JUDGMENT
Vinit Kumar Mathur, J. - Lawyers are not physically appearing in the Court in view of the unprecedented situation being faced by the country due to pandemic of novel corona virus (COVID-19).
2. Learned Public Prosecutor submits that the respondent No.2 has been informed regarding pendency of the present bail application. The factual report is taken on record.
3. The present bail application has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. on behalf of the petitioner who is in custody in connection with F.I.R. No.150/2021, Police Station Mandal, District Bhilwara for the offences under Sections 447 & 354 of the I.P.C. and under Section 7/8 of POCSO act, 2012 and under Sections 3(1)(W), 3(2) (Va) of SC/ST act, 1989.
4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was having relationship with Mst.'M' and in the present incident, there is no allegation of rape. He further submits that even as per the statement of PW-2 (Mst.'M') the rape was committed three months prior to the present incident for which no F.I.R. was lodged. Learned counsel also submits that the petitioner is being falsely implicated in the present case. Therefore, it is prayed that the petitioner may be enlarged on bail.
6. The learned Public Prosecutor opposes the bail application.
7. I have considered the submissions made at the Bar and gone through the statements of PW-2 (Mst.'M') recorded before the learned trial Court, in which she has categorically deposed that she is below the age of 18 years and made specific allegation of outraging her modesty against the petitioner and also made the allegation of the commission of rape prior to this incident.
8. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and looking to the nature of accusation and gravity of the offence, the statements of PW-2 (Mst.'M') recorded before the trial Court under Sections 161 Cr.P.C. & 164 Cr.P.C. and considering the entirety of the facts and in particular the statement of Mst.'M' who is below the age of 18 years, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am not inclined to grant bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. to the petitioner at this stage.
9. accordingly, the present bail application preferred by the petitioner under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is dismissed at this stage.
The gravity of the offence and the statement of the victim are crucial factors in deciding whether to grant bail.
The court's decision to grant bail was influenced by the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and the present situation of the country due to the pandemic of corona virus (COVID-19).
Grant of bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in light of the COVID-19 pandemic and the expected lengthy trial duration.
A defendant may be granted bail if the allegations do not directly implicate them in the commission of a serious crime, particularly when they are merely an accomplice to the principal accused.
The court's decision to grant bail was influenced by the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and the unprecedented situation of the COVID-19 pandemic.
The interpretation of evidence and circumstances, including the relationship between the appellant and the prosecutrix, played a crucial role in the Court's decision to grant bail.
The court's decision to grant bail was influenced by the unprecedented situation of the COVID-19 pandemic and the impact on the situation of the jails, justifying the release of the petitioner on bai....
The court considered the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and the absence of specific allegations of dowry demand in granting bail to the accused.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.