Rahul vs State - 2021 Supreme(Raj) 2182

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2021 Supreme(Raj) 2182

VIJAY BISHNOI
Rahul – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent

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

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 oppos

Click Here to Read the rest of this document