High CourtsSingle Bench

Hukma Ram vs State Of Rajasthan

Rajasthan High Court · Decided on 3 September 2019 · Citation: (2019) 09 RAJ CK 0020

HON’BLE JUDGES
Vijay Bishnoi, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 363, 366A, 376(3), 376(2)(N), 376(D)(A) · Protection Of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012 — Section 5(G)(L), 6 · Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 10379 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 · 404 words

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

The petitioner has been arrested in FIR No.136/2018 of Women Police Station District Barmer for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366-A, 376(3), 376(2)(N), 376(D)(A) of IPC and under Section 5(G)(L)/6 of POCSO Act. He has preferred this bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that allegation against the petitioner is to the effect that he abducted and sexually assaulted minor daughter of the complainant. It is submitted that there is delay of around one month in filing the complainat against the petitioner. It is submitted that the police have filed charge-sheet against the petitioner mainly on the basis of statement of minor daughter of the complainant recorded during the course of police investigation. It is submitted that statement of the minor daughter of the complainant have been recorded before the trial court on 05.07.2019 as PW-1, wherein she has not supported the prosecution story and turned hostile. She has also specifically stated that nobody has done anything wrong with her. It is submitted that statement of mother of the prosecutrix have been recorded before the trial court as PW-2 on 05.07.2019 and she has also not supported the prosecution story and turned hostile and also specifically stated that nobody had abducted and sexually assaulted her daughter. It is submitted that since important prosecution witnesses have not supported the prosecution story and turned hostile, it would be very difficult for the prosecution to prove the guilt of the petitioner.

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 petitioner under Section 439 Cr.P.C.

Accordingly, this bail application filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is directed that petitioner Hukma Ram S/o Shri Kistura Ram shall be released on bail in connection with FIR No.136/2018 of Women Police Station District Barmer provided he 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 appearance before that court on each and every date of hearing and whenever called upon to do so till the completion of the trial.