Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2021 Supreme(Raj) 2182

RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Vijay Bishnoi, J.
Rahul - Appellant
Versus
State - Respondent
Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 7948 of 2021
Decided On : 13-12-2021

Advocates appeared:
Swaroop Singh, Advocate, Mahipal Bishnoi, Advocate, Vipin Makkad, Advocate

The court established that bail can be granted under Section 439 Cr.P.C. when the circumstances warrant it, particularly in cases where the trial may be prolonged and the evidence is not immediately compelling.

Headnote:
[BAIL] - [CRIMINAL PROCEDURE] - The court granted bail to the petitioner under Section 439 Cr.P.C., considering the totality of circumstances, including the lack of immediate evidence of sexual assault and the potential for a lengthy trial. The court emphasized the importance of personal liberty while balancing the interests of justice.
Fact of the Case:

The petitioner was arrested for serious offences under IPC and POCSO Act. He claimed false implication, arguing that the prosecutrix had willingly accompanied him and later changed her statement under family pressure.
Finding of the Court:

The court found it appropriate to grant bail, noting the absence of immediate evidence of sexual assault in the initial statements of the prosecutrix and the lengthy nature of the trial process.
Issues: Whether the petitioner should be granted bail considering the allegations against him and the circumstances surrounding the case.
Ratio Decidendi: The court highlighted that bail should be granted when the accused is not a flight risk and when the trial is expected to take a significant amount of time, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case.
Result: The bail application was allowed, and the petitioner was directed to be released on bail upon executing a personal bond and providing sureties.

JUDGMENT

Vijay Bishnoi, J. - Heard learned counsel for the parties and also perused the material on record.

2. The petitioner has been arrested in FIR No.57/2021 of Police Station Bhadra, District Hanumangarh for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366, 376(3) 376(2)(n) I.P.C. and Section 5(L)/6 of the POCSO Act. He has preferred this bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. It is argued that as a matter of fact, the prosecutrix was in contact with the petitioner and she went with him as per her own free will. It is also argued that soon after recovery of the prosecutrix, her statements were recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. wherein she has not levelled allegation of sexual assault against the petitioner, but later on, under pressure of her family members she, in her statements recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., has levelled false allegation of sexual assault against the petitioner. It is also submitted that charge sheet has been filed and trial of the case will take time.

4. Learned Public Prosecutor as well as the learned counsel for the complainant have opposed the bail application.

5. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I deem it just and proper to grant bail to the accused petitioner under Section 439 Cr.P.C.

6. Accordingly, this bail application filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is directed that petitioner Rahul S/o Pradeep shall be released on bail in connection with FIR No.57/2021 of Police Station Bhadra, District Hanumangarh provided he executes a personal bond in a sum of Rs.50,000/-with two sound and solvent sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of learned trial court for his appearance before that court on each and every date of hearing and whenever called upon to do so till the completion of the trial.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document