Sunil vs State Of Rajasthan ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 7023 Raj

[2023:RJ-JD:28971]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 9912/2023

Sunil S/o Shri Shrawan Kumar, Aged About 21 Years, R/o Ward No. 5, Khara Chak (Kanhewala), Goluwala Police Station, District Hanumangarh. (Lodged In District Jail, Hanumangarh)

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

2. Veeru Ram S/o Shri Krishan Lal Nayak, R/o Amarsinghwala, Goluwala Police Station, Teh. Pilibangan, District Hanumangarh.

                                                                     ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)            :    Ms. Priya Bishnoi
For Respondent(s)            :    Mr. Laxman Solanki, PP
                                  Mr. Anil Bhati, for the complainant



           HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MADAN GOPAL VYAS

                                   Judgment

11/09/2023

The present second 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.214/2022, Police Station Goluwala,

District Hanumangarh, for the offences under Sections 363, 366,

376(3), 306 of the IPC and under Section 3/4(ii) of POCSO Act

and under Section 3(2)(v) and 3(2)(Va) of the SC/ST Act.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner

has falsely been implicated in the present case. It is submitted

that there are neither any call details nor evidence of mobile chats

between the petitioner and the deceased so as to connect him

with the offence alleged. Learned counsel further submits that

there is no evidence of abetment also, and therefore, no offence

[2023:RJ-JD:28971] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-9912/2023]

under Section 306 of the IPC is made out against the petitioner.

Further, it is submitted that in the present case there is no suicide

note of the deceased and there are several contradictions in the

statements of the witnesses. He submits that the charge-sheet

has been filed and the petitioner is behind the bars since long and

trial of the case will take long time. Therefore, he may be

enlarged on bail.

3. Learned Public Prosecutor as well as learned counsel

appearing for the complainant opposed the bail application.

Learned Public Prosecutor submits that the witness PW-1 Ms

Sanju, real sister of the deceased in her statement stated that

there is CCTV footage of the deceased and her dead body was

found in the 'Diggi' of Water Works. In her statement, she also

stated that her sister committed suicide as the accused was

forcing and threatening her. Learned Public Prosecutor further

submits that at the time of death, the deceased was 15 years' old.

Thus, it is prayed that the bail application may be rejected.

4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

material available on record.

5. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case,

after perusing the statement of PW-1 Sanju wherein she has

specifically made allegations against the present petitioner and

looking to the gravity of the offence, without commenting on the

merits and demerits of the case, this Court does not find it to be a

fit case for grant of bail to the petitioner, at this stage.

6. Hence, the bail application is dismissed.

7. However, the learned trial court is directed to expedite the

trial of the case.

[2023:RJ-JD:28971] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-9912/2023]

8. A copy of this order be sent to the learned trial court either

by FAX or by email.

(MADAN GOPAL VYAS),J 874-CPGoyal/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)