Back
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
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.
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.
The specific allegation of forcing the victim into prostitution influenced the court's decision in rejecting the bail application.
The court established that bail can be granted when the allegations do not substantiate the charges and when the trial is expected to be lengthy, ensuring the rights of the accused are protected.
The Court's decision was influenced by the prosecutrix's statement and the lack of mention of the petitioner's name in the police statement, highlighting the importance of consistency and credibility....
The court upheld the principle that serious allegations of sexual offenses, particularly those involving non-consent, are sufficient grounds to deny bail.
Granting bail based on the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case.
The court has the discretion to grant bail to the accused petitioner under Section 439 Cr.P.C. based on the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case.
The specific allegation by the victim and the relationship of the petitioner to the victim were crucial in the court's decision to reject the bail application.
The court considered the delay in FIR lodging, inconsistencies in the victim's statement, and identification issues in rejecting the bail application.
The court has the discretion to grant bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. based on the totality of the facts and circumstances, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case.
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
