High CourtsSINGLE BENCH

Ramjeevan @ Pappu S/o Shri Mugla Ram vs State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan High Court · Decided on 30 March 2017 · Citation: (2017) 03 RAJ CK 0113

HON’BLE JUDGES
Sandeep Mehta
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
<a href=3863>Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973</a>, <a href=3863-439>Section 439</a>, <a href=3863-151>Section 151</a>, <a href=3863-164>Section 164</a>, <a href=3863-107>Section 107</a> - Special powers of High Court or Court of Session regarding bail
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
2333 of 2017
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

45 paragraphs · 451 words
1.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public

Prosecutor as well as learned counsel for the complainant. Perused

the material available on record.

2.

The instant bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has

been preferred on behalf of the petitioner who is in custody in

connection with F.I.R. No.385/2016, registered at Police Station

Dhorimanna, District Barmer for the offences under Sections 365

and 376 /D IPC .

3.

Shri Rathore urges that it is a case of consensual relations

between two major persons which has been given a twist of rape

for oblique motives. Drawing attention of the Court to Rojnamcha

entry made at the P.S. Dhorimanna on 19.12.2016 at 7:45 PM, he

urges that the petitioner and prosecutrix were apprehended by the

police officers of the said police station while roaming in the

village in suspicious condition and making a ruckus. The girl upon

enquiry told that she had come with the petitioner of her own free

will. She divulge the name of her husband and father on which

they were called and she was sent with her husband. The FIR of

the incident was lodged on the next day whereupon, the petitioner

and few more have been implicated for the offence of gang rape.

Shri Rathore ex-facie urges that looking to the sequence of events

as narrated in the Rojnamcha entry, the whole story set up in the

FIR and the statement of the prosecutrix recorded under Section

164 Cr.P.C. is false and fabricated and, therefore, the petitioner

deserves to be enlarged on bail.

4.

Learned P.P. and learned counsel for the complainant though

vehemently oppose the submissions advanced by the petitioner''s

counsel but they too could not deny the facts as recorded in the

proceedings undertaken under Section 107 and 151 Cr.P.C. at P.S.

Dhorimana on 19.12.2016. The gist of the report is reproduced

herein below for the sake of ready reference :-

"VERNACULAR MATTER OMITTED"

Any comment on the merits of the case in light of the

abovementioned sequence of events may prejudice the trial but

having regard to the facts and circumstances available on record,

this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner deserves to be

released on bail.

Accordingly, the bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is

allowed and it is directed that the petitioner Ramjeevan @ Pappu

arrested in connection with the F.I.R. No.385/2016, registered at

Police Station Dhorimanna, District Barmer shall be released on

bail provided he furnishes a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- and two

surety bonds of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned

trial court with the stipulation to appear before that Court on all

dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.