High CourtsSingle Bench

Kamlesh @ Kamalram vs State Of Rajasthan

Rajasthan High Court · Decided on 19 February 2021 · Citation: (2021) 02 RAJ CK 0105

HON’BLE JUDGES
Vijay Bishnoi, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 363, 366, 376 · Protection Of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — Section 4, 6 · Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 161, 164, 439
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 1418 Of 2021
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

23 paragraphs · 515 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.154/2017 of Police Station Vallabhnagar, District Udaipur for the offences punishable under Sections 363,

366 and 376 IPC and Sections 4 and 6 of POCSO Act, 2012. He has preferred this bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the allegations against the petitioner of abduction and sexual assault are false. It is argued that on

07.09.2017, the prosecutrix eloped with the petitioner and lived with him as his wife at various places at Gujarat. It is further submitted that on

11.09.2020, the police recovered the prosecutrix and at that time she was having seven months' pregnancy and her statements were recorded under

Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C., wherein she has admitted that she went with the petitioner as per her own free will and wants to live with him only. It

is submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed and the trial of the case will take time.

Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application and argued that at the time of abduction of the prosecutrix by the petitioner in September,

2017, she was less than 13 years of age. It is further submitted that the consent of a minor girl is of no consequence and as such the petitioner is not

entitled to be enlarged on bail.

After perusing the charge-sheet, it is not in dispute that at the time of alleged incident of abduction of the prosecutrix, she was less than 13 years of

age, however, as per her statements recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. she lived with the petitioner for around three years as his wife at

various places and in September, 2020 she was having seven months' pregnancy. It is informed that at present the prosecurix is living with her parents

and recently has delivered a baby girl.

Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, after taking into consideration the fact that the prosecutrix has given birth to a

child and the petitioner happened to be the father of that child and also taking into consideration that the prosecutrix in her statements recorded under

Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. has specifically stated that she wants to live with the petitioner, 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 - Kamlesh @ Kamalram S/o Surajmal shall

be released on bail in connection with FIR No.154/2017 of Police Station Vallabhnagar, District Udaipur 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.