Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Narain Lal vs State Of Rajasthan ... on 18 April, 2023
Bench: Kuldeep Mathur
[2023/RJJD/010661]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 3024/2023
Narain Lal S/o Shri Natwar Lal Sansi, Aged About 19 Years, R/o
Meza Road Mandal At Present R/o Keer Khera Road Mandal P.S.
Dist. Bhilwara.
(Lodged In Dist. Jail Bhilwara)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P.
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Neeraj Kumar Gurjar.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. S.S. Rajpurohit, P.P.
Mr. Ashok Kumar.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR
Order
18/04/2023
This application for bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been
filed by the petitioner who has been arrested in connection with
F.I.R. No.06/2023, registered at Police Station Mandal, District
Bhilwara, for offences under Sections 363, 366, 376(2)(n) of
Indian Penal Code & under Section 5(L)/6 of POCSO Act.
Learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for
the complainant jointly submitted that a compromise has been
arrived at between the parties.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that keeping in
view the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in
the case of Prashant Bhartiya Vs. State of Delhi & Ors. in
Criminal Appeal No.708 of 2021 decided on 30.07.2021, it is a fit
case to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Reliance was also placed on
[2023/RJJD/010661] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-3024/2023]
order dated 22.03.2023 passed by a Co-ordinate Bench of this
Court in the case of Vinod Kanjar Vs. State of Rajasthan &
Anr. in S.B. Criminal Misc. (Pet.) No.1143/2023. It was
prayed that the trial of the case will take sufficiently long time,
therefore, the benefit of bail should be granted to the accused-
petitioner. The relevant portion of the judgment dated 30.07.2021
passed in the case of Prashant Bhartiya (supra), is reproduced
hereinbelow:-
"3. Respondent No.2 had lodged a complaint
alleging, inter alia, that the Appellant had
committed an offence under Section 376 of the
Indian Penal code. It is undisputed that both
were living together for a considerable while.
The complainant's allegation is that the
Appellant duped her by misrepresenting to her
that he is divorced. The complainant, according
to the accused, is not unmarried and her
marriage subsists.
4. During pendency of the proceedings, the
parties were referred to mediation having
regard to the fact that a child was born in the
meanwhile (i.e. in the year 2018). As a
consequence, a mediated settlement limited to
the maintenance and upkeep fo the child was
arrived at by them.
5. Having regard to these facts and the
submissions made on behalf of the complainant
- who does not dispute that this may not be an
appropriate case for pursuing the prosecution
further, this Court is of the considered view
that the criminal proceedings must be quashed.
6. In the peculiar circumstances of the present
case, the impugned judgment of the High Court
[2023/RJJD/010661] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-3024/2023]
is set aside; the FIR (No.616) and all
consequent proceedings be quashed. It is,
however, made clear that this order will not
come in the way or in any manner prejudice
the contentions of the parties in any other
pending proceedings, which shall 20-09-2022
be decided in accordance with law.
7. The appeal is allowed to the above extent."
Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application.
Having considered the rival submissions, facts and
circumstances of the case, so also the fact that compromise has
been arrived at between the parties, without expressing any
opinion on merits/demerits of the case, this Court is of the opinion
that the bail application filed by the petitioner deserves to be
accepted.
Consequently, the bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C.
is allowed. It is ordered that the accused-petitioner Narain Lal
S/o Shri Natwar Lal Sansi arrested in connection with F.I.R.
No.06/2023, registered at Police Station Mandal, District Bhilwara,
shall be released on bail, if not wanted in any other case, provided
he furnishes a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- and two sureties of
Rs.25,000/- each, to the satisfaction of learned trial court, for his
appearance before that court on each & every date of hearing and
whenever called upon to do so till completion of the trial.
(KULDEEP MATHUR),J
79-Prashant/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
