Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH
Anil Kumar Upman, J.
Sunil Mahavar – Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 10962 of 2023
Decided On : 06-09-2023
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. bail application under cr.p.c. with charges stated. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. arguments for and against bail application presented. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. court's observations on case circumstances for bail. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. order granting bail with conditions outlined. (Para 7) |
ORDER :
1. Petitioner has filed this bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.
2. F.I.R. No. 258/2023 was registered at Police Station Vidhyadhar Nagar, Jaipur City (North) for the offences under Sections 376 (2) (n) & 506 of IPC. Later on Police filed charge-sheet for the offences under Sections 376 (2) (n), 506 & 323 of IPC.
3. It is contended by counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel further submits that petitioner aged about 22 years and prosecutrix aged about 19 years were in consensual relationship. The relationship between the petitioner and prosecutrix was consensual in nature, which is evident from the photographs which have been placed on record. Counsel further submits that the alleged offence was committed in the month of April, 2023 while the matter was reported in the month of July,2023. Counsel further submits that the petitioner is in custody since 15.07.2023. Charge-sheet has been filed and trial will take considerable time.
4. Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed this bail application.
5. I have considered the contentions.
6. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties and the fact that charge-sheet has been filed and looking to the period of custody, but without commenting anything on merits and demerits of the case, I deem it proper to allow the bail application.
7. This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner shall be released on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court with the stipulation that he shall appear before that Court and any court to which the matter is transferred, on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.
The court established that the presence of evidence indicating a consensual relationship and the age of the prosecutrix at the time of the complaint are significant factors in determining bail in sex....
The court granted bail due to the lack of evidence against the petitioner and the consensual nature of the relationship with the victim, emphasizing no risk of influencing witnesses.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that in cases involving bail applications for offenses under IPC, the court considers factors such as the delay in filing the FIR, evidence of forc....
The court determined that the relationship was consensual, undermining claims of forceful sexual assault, and granted bail based on the applicant's lack of prior criminal history.
The court determined that the relationship between the Applicant and prosecutrix was consensual, leading to the granting of bail despite serious allegations.
The court considered the consensual relationship between the victim and the accused-applicant, the likelihood of a long trial, and the fact that the victim was a major lady in granting bail to the ac....
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
