Back
2022 Supreme(Raj) 2714
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
Manoj Kumar Garg, J.
Lakhan Singh @ Lakhan Banna – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 11275 of 2022
Decided On : 08-12-2022
Important Points
Subject
Criminal Law - Bail Applications
Act Referred
INDIAN PENAL CODE : S.323, S.341, S.376, S.376(2)(n), S.384, S.406
PROTECTION OF CHILDREN FROM SEXUAL OFFENCES ACT : S.3, S.4, S.5, S.6
Headnote
Bail Application - Allegation of Prostitution - Bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. rejected due to specific allegation of forcing victim into prostitution
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner filed a bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in connection with an FIR for offences under IPC and POCSO Act. The victim had been examined before the trial Court and had alleged that the petitioner took money from people and forced her into prostitution.
Finding of the Court:
The court rejected the bail application, considering the specific allegation of forcing the victim into prostitution as per the victim's statement before the trial Court.
Issues: The issue was whether the petitioner should be granted bail despite the specific allegation of forcing the victim into prostitution.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the specific allegation of forcing the victim into prostitution as per the victim's statement, leading to the rejection of the bail application.
Final Decision: The bail application filed by the petitioner was rejected, with the trial Court directed to expedite the trial.
C.S. Rajpurohit, Advocate, Shrawan Bishnoi, Advocate
JUDGMENT
Manoj Kumar Garg, J. - The present bail application has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. The petitioner has been arrested in connection with FIR No.266/2021 of Police Station Kudi Bhagtasani, Jodhpur for the offence punishable under Sections 376, 376(2)(n), 406, 323, 341, 384 of IPC and Sections 3/4, 5/6 of POCSO Act.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that victim has been examined before the trial Court as PW-1 and according to her statement, no allegation of committing rape has been levelled against the present petitioner. The petitioner is in the judicial custody and the trial of the case will take sufficiently long time. Therefore, the benefit of bail should be granted to the accused-petitioner.
3. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the prayer for bail.
4. I have considered the arguments advanced before me and carefully gone through the record.
5. According to the statement of victim(PW-1), specific allegation has been levelled by the victim against the present petitioner that he took money from the people and used to force her for prostitution, therefore, this Court is not inclined to grant benefit of bail to the petitioner.
6. In the above circumstances, the bail application filed by the petitioner is hereby rejected.
7. However, trial Court is directed to expedite the trial.
