Manoj Kumar Bhardwaj S/O Shri ... vs State Of Rajasthan
2021 Latest Caselaw 2222 Raj/2

       HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                   BENCH AT JAIPUR

               S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 285/2021

Manoj Kumar Bhardwaj S/o Shri Mahendra Kumar Bhardwaj,
Aged About 51 Years, R/o Plot No. 38-39, Bheruji Residency,
Near Virat Enclave, Lalarpura, Gandhi Path, Jaipur (Raj)
                                                                  ----Appellant
                                   Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p
2. Smt. Victim W/o Late Shri Narendra Mandarwal, R/o E-9/563,
Chitrakoot Nagar, Jaipur (Raj.)
                                                                ----Respondent

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Nitesh Pareek for Mr. Ajay Kumar Bajpai For Complainant(s) : Mr. Vivek Choudhary for Mr. J. R.

                               Chaudhary
For State                :     Mr. Sher Singh Mahla, PP



            HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ BHANDARI

                         Judgment / Order

09/03/2021

1. Appellant has preferred this appeal aggrieved by order dated

13.01.2021 passed by Special Judge SC/ST Cases, Jaipur

whereby, bail application filed by the appellant under Section 438

Cr.P.C. was rejected.

2. F.I.R. No.16/2020 was registered at Police Station Chitrakoot

Jaipur for offence under Sections 420, 406, 376 I.P.C. and

Sections 3(1)(w) of SC/ST Act.

3. It is contended by counsel for the appellant that a false case

has been registered against the appellant. From the allegation, it

is evident that the complainant was having relationship with the

appellant on her own free will. It is also contended that appellant

(2 of 2) [CRLAS-285/2021]

has given money to the complainant and the complainant had

earlier also filed a complaint against some other person and has

extracted money.

4. Learned Public Prosecutor and counsel for the complainant

have opposed the appeal. It is contended that Section 18-A of the

SC/ST Act bars entertaining of Bail Application under Section 438

Cr.P.C. It is also contended that at this stage, only FIR is to be

read and from the perusal of FIR, offence under the SC/ST Act

alongwith IPC is made out.

5. I have considered the contentions.

6. The complainant is a widow, who has alleged in the FIR that

the appellant promised to marry her and on account of the

promise, continued to have sexual relation with her. It is also

contended that the appellant has taken money from the

complainant. There being specific allegation and bar under Section

18-A of SC/ST Act, I am not inclined to entertain the appeal.

7. The Criminal Appeal is accordingly, dismissed.

(PANKAJ BHANDARI),J

ARTI SHARMA /50

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)