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
12 paragraphs · 223 wordsThe petitioner undertakes to appropriately stamp the petition as per the Rules within 48 hours of resumption of normal functioning of the court. The
petition is taken up through video conference on the basis of such undertaking.
The petitioner claims that a vague complaint was lodged against the petitioner without indicating any date of the incident. The petitioner says that the
story made out in the complaint is unconvincing.
The State refers to the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 of the Code. The victim also claims that she is pregnant as a result of the
incident. It is also understandable why the complaint was lodged some five or six weeks after the date of the incident.
However, considering the entire conspectus, the custodial interrogation of the petitioner may not be necessary as long he cooperates with the
investigation and does not attempt to make any contact with the victim, till the investigation is complete.
Subject to above, in the event of arrest, the petitioner will be released on bail on furnishing security of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) together
with personal release bond of equivalent value to the satisfaction of the arresting officer.
The petitioner will also comply with the conditions laid down in Section 438(2) of the Code.
CRM 4692 of 2020 and CRAN 2872 of 2020 are disposed of.