Suganlal @ Sanju S/o Shri Sawaroopram vs The State of Rajasthan

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public

Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.

The present bail application has been filed under Section 439

Cr.P.C. on behalf of the petitioner, who is in custody in connection

with F.I.R. No.63/2016, Police Station Siriyari, District Pali for the

offences under Sections 363, 366 & 376(2)(1) IPC and Section ?

of the POCSO Act.

Counsel for the petitioner contends that the victim Mst.S was

having long standing love affairs with the present petitioner even

though she was married to Shrawan Nath. She voluntarily eloped

with the petitioner in December, 2015. Her mother Smt.Tulsi

lodged a missing person''s report at P.S. Siriyari on 7.1.2016. In

connection with the enquiry of the said missing person''s report,

the petitioner and the victim were discovered by the police officers

of P.S. Sojat Road on 1.2.2016 and on enquiry being made, the

victim clearly stated that she had gone to Mumbai with her friend

Suganlal voluntarily. During the course of said enquiry, the victim

disclosed her age to be 18 years and did not level any allegation

of sexual assault. After more than 18 days thereafter, the mother

of the victim filed a complaint in the Court of Judicial Magistrate,

Marwar Junction against four persons including the present

petitioner for the allegations involving offences under Sections

366, 120B and 376(g) IPC. The said complaint was forwarded to

the police for investigation where FIR No.63/2016 was lodged for

the offences under Sections 366 and 376 IPC and Section 3/4 of

the POCSO Act. The victim was examined under Sections 161 and

164 Cr.P.C. and in such statements, she attributed the allegations

of rape to Naresh Nath, the present petitioner and one Shiv Nath

in that sequence. However, the I.O. did not find the case proved

against the other two accused and has charge-sheeted the

petitioner alone. The bail application filed on behalf of the

petitioner was rejected by the learned trial judge by order dated

4.1.2017. Hence, the instant bail application.

Learned counsel for the petitioner urges that the entire

prosecution is false and fabricated. In the proceedings of missing

person''s report, the victim and her mother gave out her age to be

18 years. The victim stated of voluntary and consensual relations

with the petitioner. FIR was filed after significant delay for oblique

motives. Other two co-accused namely, Naresh and Shivlal against

whom allegations of sexual assault were made by the victim have

not been charge-sheeted by the police. He thus urges that the

petitioner deserves to be released on bail.

Learned P.P. though vehemently opposes the arguments

advanced by the petitioner''s counsel but he too is not in a position

to dispute the fact that the story as disclosed during the

proceedings of the missing person''s report totally demolishes the

subsequent case as set up in the belated FIR.

Be that as it may. Any comment on the merits of the case

can prejudice the trial but having regard to the entirety of the

facts and circumstances as available on record and upon a

consideration of the arguments advanced at the Bar, this Court is

of the opinion that the bail application filed by the petitioner

deserves to be accepted.

Consequently, the bail application is allowed. It is ordered

that the accused-petitioner, Suganlal @ Sanju arrested in

connection with F.I.R. No.63/2016, Police Station Siriyari, District

Pali 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.