High CourtsSingle Bench

Gamera Ram vs State Of Rajasthan

Rajasthan High Court · Decided on 4 March 2024 · Citation: (2024) 03 RAJ CK 0010

HON’BLE JUDGES
Kuldeep Mathur, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 376, 384, 450 · Protection�Of�Children�From�Sexual�Offences�Act, 2012 — Section 3(a), 4(1)
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 919 Of 2024
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

10 paragraphs · 504 words

Kuldeep Mathur, J

This application for bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner who has been arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.26/2021, registered at Police Station Binjrad, District Barmer, for offences under Sections 450, 376, 384 of IPC and Section 3(a)/4(1) of POCSO Act.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the present petitioner who is aged about 21 years has been falsely implicated in the present case.

Drawing attention of the Court towards the FIR, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the FIR has been lodged against the present petitioner after a delay of about four months from the date of the alleged incident without furnishing any justification for the delay in lodging of the same.

Attention of the Court was further drawn towards the Medical Examination Report of the prosecutrix to contend that no external injuries over the genitals region or over the body of the prosecutrix have been found.

Lastly, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the statements of the prosecutrix have already been recorded before the competent criminal court on 05.07.2023 as PW.1. Since, the statements of the prosecutrix have already been recorded before the competent criminal court, there is no apprehension of she being influenced by the present petitioner. It was further contended that the present petitioner is in judicial custody and the trial of the case will take sufficiently long time, therefore, the benefit of bail should be granted to the accused-petitioner.

Per Contra, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application and submitted that looking to the seriousness of the accusations levelled against the present petitioner, he does not deserve to be enlarged on bail.

Having considered the rival submissions, facts and circumstances of the case and after perusing the challan papers, this Court prima facie finds that the FIR has been lodged against the present petitioner after a delay of about four months from the date of the alleged incident without furnishing any justification for the delay in lodging of the same; in the Medical Examination Report of the prosecutrix, no injuries have been found; the statements of the prosecutrix have already been recorded before the competent criminal court and there is no apprehension of she being influenced by the present petitioner. Thus, without expressing any opinion on merits/demerits of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

Consequently, the bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed. It is ordered that the accused-petitioner Gamera Ram S/o Jama Ram, arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.26/2021, registered at Police Station Binjrad, District Barmer, shall be released on bail, if not wanted in any other case, provided he furnishes a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- and two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each, to the satisfaction of learned trial court, for his appearance before that court on each & every date of hearing and whenever called upon to do so till completion of the trial.