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

2021 Supreme(Raj) 1497

RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Sandeep Mehta, J.
Vikram - Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 569 of 2021
Decided On : 11-08-2021

Advocates appeared:
Rajendra Singh Rathore, Advocate, Laxman Solanki, Advocate, J.V.S. Deora, Advocate

The court established that delays in filing FIRs and the context of the allegations can significantly influence bail decisions, particularly in cases involving the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

Headnote:

BAIL - SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act - The court analyzed the circumstances surrounding the alleged abduction and rape of the prosecutrix, considering the delay in filing the FIR and the appellant's defense of being misled into marriage. The court highlighted the importance of timely reporting in such cases and ultimately decided to grant bail, emphasizing the need for a fair assessment of the evidence presented.

Fact of the Case:

The appellant was in custody for alleged abduction and rape of the prosecutrix, who was reportedly sold to him after being abducted by another individual. The FIR was filed with a significant delay, and the appellant claimed he was misled into marrying the prosecutrix.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the delay in filing the FIR and the circumstances surrounding the marriage raised questions about the credibility of the allegations. The appellant's defense suggested he was a victim of deception.

Issues: Whether the appellant should be granted bail considering the nature of the allegations, the delay in filing the FIR, and the appellant's claims regarding the marriage.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the overall facts and circumstances, including the delay in reporting the crime and the appellant's defense, warranted the granting of bail.

Result: The appeal was allowed, the order rejecting bail was set aside, and the appellant was granted bail subject to certain conditions.

JUDGMENT

Sandeep Mehta, J. - Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned Public Prosecutor, learned counsel for the complainant and perused the material available on record.

2. The instant appeal has been filed under Section 14-A SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act on behalf of the appellant, who is in custody in connection with F.I.R. No.160/2020 registered at the Police Station Kotra, District Udaipur for the offences under Sections 370-A, 120-B and 376 IPC and Section 3(2)(5) of the SC/ST Act, against the order dated 26.05.2021 passed by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act Cases, Udaipur in Criminal Misc. Case No.985/2021, whereby the bail application preferred under Section 439 Cr.P.C. on behalf of the appellant was rejected.

3. I have heard and considered the submissions advanced by learned counsel Mr. Rajendra Singh Rathore, representing the appellant, learned Public Prosecutor and Mr. J.V.S. Deora, representing the complainant, and have gone through the material available on record.

4. The prosecutrix Mst. 'G' was allegedly abducted from her father's house by one Amrit in the month of September 2020. The FIR came to be registered in the month of November 2020 by Devilal alleging that his daughter was abducted by Amrit and she was taken to Gujarat and he thereafter subjected her to rape for 10-15 days. Amrit was apprehended by the police, on which, Mst. 'G' was left to fend for herself. Co-accused Nuriya, his wife and daughter Kali came and took Mst. 'G' to Ramgarh and allegedly sold her to the appellant herein, who also subjected her to rape. However, there are available on record photographs of marriage ceremony of the appellant with the prosecutrix. The petitioner himself has filed a report to the SHO, Police Station Vadnagar alleging that the parents of the girl approached him in the month of November 2020 and married the girl to him after taking money. At that time, the girl's name was given out to be Parul. The girl, however, ditched him and went away in a clandestine manner. Thus, the appellant himself has taken a defence of being cheated into the marriage with the prosecutrix. Admittedly, the prosecutrix came back from Gujarat in the month of October 2020, but despite available opportunities, the FIR came to be lodged after a gross delay.

5. In this view of the matter and having regard to the over all facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the appellant deserves indulgence of bail and thus, the order rejecting the application for bail filed on behalf of the appellant cannot be sustained.

6. Consequently, the instant appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated 26.05.2021 passed by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act Cases, Udaipur in Criminal Misc. Case No.985/2021 is set aside. It is ordered that the accused-appellant Vikram S/o Virsang Thakor arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.160/2020 registered at the Police Station Kotra, District Udaipur shall be released on bail; provided he furnishes a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- and two surety bonds of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court with the stipulation to appear before that Court on all dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
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