High CourtsSingle Bench

Deva Ram And Ors vs State Of Rajasthan

Rajasthan High Court · Decided on 12 April 2019 · Citation: (2019) 04 RAJ CK 0026

HON’BLE JUDGES
Vijay Bishnoi, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Protection Of Children from Sexual Offices Act, 2012 — Section 3, 4, 5(G), 342, 376(D) · Protection Of Children’s Rights Act, 2005 — Section 3, 4, 5(G), 342, 376(D) · Information Technology Act, 2000 — Section 67(A) · Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 3916 Of 2019
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

5 paragraphs · 361 words

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned Public Prosecutor and also perused the material on record.

The petitioners have been arrested in connection with FIR No.60/2018 of Police Station Sindhari, District Barmer for the offences punishable under Sections 342, 376(D), 3/4, 5(G)/3 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offices Act, 2012 and Protection of Children's Rights Act, 2005 and Section 67(A) of Information & Technology Act. They have preferred this bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C.

Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the complainant Cheni Devi and prosecutrix as well as parents of the prosecturix have not supported the prosecution story and turned hostile. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the police have filed charge-sheet against the petitioners on the basis of statements of above witnesses during the course of investigation. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that PW 5 Himta Ram, father of the prosecutrix, PW-4 Chaini Devi complainant and sister-in-law of the prosecutrix, PW-3 Jhamku, mother of the prosecutrix and PW-2 prosecutrix herself have not supported the prosecution story and turned hostile. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that since important prosecution witnesses have turned hostile, it is very difficult for the prosecution to prove the guilt of the petitioners in the trial.

Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application. 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 petitioners under Section 439 Cr.P.C.

Accordingly, this bail application filed under Sec.439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is directed that petitioners No.1 Deva Ram s/o Ameda Ram and No.2 Kamlesh S/o Uda Ram shall be released on bail in connection with FIR No.60/2018 of Police Station Sindhari, District Barmer provided each of them 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/her appearance before that court on each and every date of hearing and whenever called upon to do so till the completion of the trial.