Anil Kumar Jaiman @ Kalu Jaiman S/O ... vs State Of Rajasthan
2021 Latest Caselaw 2521 Raj/2

       HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                   BENCH AT JAIPUR

              S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 733/2021

Anil Kumar Jaiman @ Kalu Jaiman S/o Babulal Jaiman, Aged
About 21 Years, Resident Of Beed Ki Dhani, Tan Maheshwara
Kala, Police Station Sadar Dausa, District Dausa (Rajasthan)
(Accused Petitioner Confined In District Jail Dausa)
                                                                  ----Appellant
                                  Versus
1.     State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p
2.     Victim W/o Murari Lal, Aged About 31 Years, Resident Of
       Maheshvara Kalan At Present Patel Nagar Agra Road,
       Dausa
                                                               ----Respondents

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Prakash Chand Thakuriya through VC For Complainant(s) : Mr. Ritesh Jain through VC For State : Mr. Mangal Singh Saini, PP

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ BHANDARI

Judgment / Order

29/06/2021

1. Appellant has preferred this appeal aggrieved by order dated

06.04.2021 passed by Special Judge SC/ST (Prevention of

Atrocities) Cases, Dausa, whereby, bail application filed by the

appellant under Section 439 Cr.P.C. was rejected.

2. F.I.R. No.39/2021 was registered at Police Station Mahila

Thana, District Dausa for offence under Sections 365, 376, 511,

506 I.P.C. and Sections 3 (2) (Va) of SC/ST Act.

3. It is contended by counsel for the appellant that prosecutrix

is a married lady. In the F.I.R., she has levelled allegation of

attempt to commit rape against the appellant. There is no injury

(2 of 2) [CRLAS-733/2021]

caused to the prosecutrix, however, in her statement recorded

under Section 164 Cr.P.C. she has improved her version and has

levelled allegation with regard to rape against the present

appellant.

4. Learned Public Prosecutor and counsel for the complainant

have opposed the appeal. It is contended that statement of child

of prosecutrix has been recorded, who has also levelled allegation

with regard to rape against the appellant.

5. I have considered the contentions.

6. Considering the contentions put forth by counsel for the

appellant, I deem it proper to allow the appeal.

7. The order dated 06.04.2021 is quashed and set aside and

the appeal is, accordingly, allowed and it is directed that accused-

appellant shall be released on bail 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 appear before that Court and any Court to

which the matter be transferred, on all subsequent dates of

hearing and as and when called upon to do so.

(PANKAJ BHANDARI),J

ARTI SHARMA /31

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)