Vivek Kumar Sain @ Vicky S/O ... vs State Of Rajasthan
2022 Latest Caselaw 7362 Raj/2

       HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                   BENCH AT JAIPUR

   S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 13637/2022

Vivek Kumar Sain @ Vicky S/o Rameshchandra Sain, Aged About
30 Years, R/o Prandeda, P.S. Kekri Sadar, District Ajmer,
Rajasthan. At Present In Central Jail Ajmer
                                                                  ----Petitioner
                                   Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P.
                                                                ----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pradeep Sharma, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mangal Singh Saini, PP

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND

Order

18/11/2022

This bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed

by petitioner in connection with FIR No.98/2022 registered at

Police Station Kekri Sadar, District Ajmer wherein he is charged for

offences punishable under Sections 313 & 376 (2) (n) of IPC.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the instant

case is a case of consent and after a delay of three years, FIR has

been lodged and the petitioner has been falsely booked in this

case. Counsel submits that mere promise to perform marriage and

maintaining the relationship on that promise does not amount to

any offence of rape.

In support of his contentions, he has placed reliance on the

judgment of this Court in the case of Anup K. Pal Vs. State of

Rajasthan & Anr., reported in 2015 (3) Cri.L.R (Raj.) 1491

(2 of 2) [CRLMB-13637/2022]

and submits that under these circumstances, indulgence of bail

be extended to the petitioner.

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail

application and submits that at the time of the incident, the age of

the prosecutrix was less than 18 years and after investigation,

police has submitted charge-sheet against the petitioner for the

offence punishable under Sections 376(2) (n) of IPC and under

Sections 3/4 and 5(L)/ 6 of the POCSO Act. Learned Public

Prosecutor further submits that under these circumstances, the

consent of a minor is no concern in the eye of law, so the

petitioner does not deserve any indulgence.

Looking to the gravity of the matter and the allegations

levelled against the petitioner in the statement of the victim

recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C., I do not find it a fit case for

grant of bail.

Hence, the present bail application stands dismissed.

The petitioner would be at liberty to renew the prayer of bail

after recording the statement of the victim.

However, the trial Court is directed to record the statement

of the victim on priority basis.

(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J

PRAVESH/53

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)