Back
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
KULDEEP MATHUR, J
PRAVEEN KUMAR – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF RAJASTHAN – Respondent
ORDER :
(KULDEEP MATHUR, J.)
This application for bail under Section 483 BNSS has been filed by the petitioner who has been arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.99/2024 registered at Police Station Sanchore, Dist. Sanchore (Jalore), for the offences under Sections 351, 363, 354, 376(2)(n) and 343/34 of IPC and Sections 3/4 of POCSO Act.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.
3. Looking to the nature of allegations against the present petitioner, this Court vide order dated 10.02.2025 directed the learned Public Prosecutor to call for the case diary. In compliance of the order dated 10.02.2025, learned Public Prosecutor has produced the case diary before this Court.
4. From a perusal of the case diary, this Court prima facie finds that the petitioner and the victim ‘M’ are close relatives. Initially, father of the victim ‘M’ lodged an FIR dated 01.03.2024 alleging inter alia that his daughter ‘M’ has been forcibly abducted by the present petitioner and co-accused Jitendra. During the course of investigation in connection with the present FIR lodged by the father of the victim ‘M’, the police discovered her. Sh
The court granted bail considering the relationship between the accused and victim, lack of criminal antecedents, and absence of evidence indicating risk of tampering or flight.
The court granted bail due to contradictions in the prosecutrix's statements, suggesting possible false allegations, and no risk of influencing witnesses or fleeing from justice.
The court determined that a minor's voluntary elopement with the accused, coupled with no evidence of coercion, justified granting bail despite serious charges.
The court granted bail due to insufficient evidence supporting allegations against the petitioner, emphasizing the context of prior relationships and lack of incriminating materials.
The court emphasized that prior acquaintance and lack of evidence of coercion justified granting bail, highlighting the importance of assessing risks of influencing witnesses.
The court granted bail based on the victim's acknowledgment of a consensual relationship and lack of evidence tampering concerns, despite serious charges against the petitioner.
A delay in filing an FIR and lack of injuries can raise doubts about the credibility of allegations, justifying the grant of bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C.
The court granted bail based on the prosecutrix's initial consent to live with the petitioner, emphasizing the lack of specific allegations regarding theft.
The court granted bail based on the victim's voluntary actions and lack of evidence of coercion or risk of influencing witnesses.
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
