High CourtsSingle Bench

Sonu @ Sannu vs State Of Rajasthan

Rajasthan High Court · Decided on 21 November 2020 · Citation: (2020) 11 RAJ CK 0067

HON’BLE JUDGES
Mahendar Kumar Goyal, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 323, 376(2), 452, 354, 506 · Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 164, 437(3), 439
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 12174 Of 2020
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

17 paragraphs · 384 words

The present bail application has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. The petitioner has been arrested in connection with FIR No.234/2020 registered

at Police Station Nasirabad Sadar, District Ajmer for the offence under Section(s) 323, 452, 354, 506, 376(2)(n) & 377 of I.P.C. and 3/4, 5(L)/6 of the

Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that on account of ongoing revenue dispute between the parties, the petitioner has falsely been

implicated in this case. Drawing attention of this Court towards the contents of the FIR, learned counsel for the petitioner contended that in spite of

allegation that the prosecutrix was being subjected to rape by the petitioner for last about one year; in the complaint filed on 18.07.2020 by the

complainant, no such allegation was levelled. Learned counsel for the petitioner also referred the statement of Smt. Sharda, mother of the prosecutrix

recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. wherein, she has levelled no allegation against the present petitioner. He submitted that insofar as age of the

prosecutrix is concerned, it is subject matter of trial. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 12.08.2020,

charge sheet has already been filed, trial of the case will take time, he has no criminal antecedents and prays for his release on bail.

Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application. Taking into consideration the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner,

the nature of allegation against him, his length of custody, filing of the charge sheet, absence of criminal antecedents and the material available in the

case diary; but, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this court deems it just and proper to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner Sonu @ Sannu Son of Sugan shall be released on bail under

Section 439 Cr.P.C. in connection with afore-mentioned FIR registered at concerned Police Station, provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum

of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lac only) together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) each to the satisfaction of

the trial court with the stipulation that he shall comply with all the conditions laid down under Section 437(3) Cr.P.C.