Raju Rajwar. Vs. the State of Jharkhand. - Court Judgment

Excerpt:
[mr. justice a.n. venugopala gowda, j.] w.p.no. 19935/2009 is filed under articles 226 & 227 of the constitution of india pr/wing to call for the entire records relating to concerning and connected with the impugned order & proceedings dated 11.3.2009 in ref. no.47/06 on its file. from the iii addl. labour court. bangalore vide annexure -a peruse the same and quash the said order by declaring that the proceedings culminating in the same are void and incompetent. [mr. justice a.n. venugopala gowda, j.] w.p.no.35288/2010 is piled under articles 226 & 227 of the constitution of india praying to quash the award dated 11.3.2009 passed by the iii addl. labour court, bangalore in ref.no.47/2006 the certified copies of which are marked as annexure - a to the extent the petitioner is aggrieved......in this case; there was affair between this petitioner and the victim girl; she was moving with the petitioner voluntarily; nothing has been done against her consent; there is no allegation of any ill-behaviour; petitioner is in custody since january 2011.3. learned a.p.p. opposed the petitioner's prayer for bail and submitted that there is direct allegation of kidnapping the minor girl by this petitioner. 4. the girl has been examined under section 164 cr.p.c. and she has supported the said allegation; she has made direct allegation against the petitioner.5. regard being had to the nature of allegation and material against him, i am not inclined to release the petitioner on bail. petitioner's prayer for bail is rejected.

Judgment:
1. The petitioner is an accused in the case registered under Section 366A of the Indian Penal Code.

2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case; there was affair between this petitioner and the victim girl; she was moving with the petitioner voluntarily; nothing has been done against her consent; there is no allegation of any ill-behaviour; petitioner is in custody since January 2011.

3. Learned A.P.P. opposed the petitioner's prayer for bail and submitted that there is direct allegation of kidnapping the minor girl by this petitioner.

4. The girl has been examined under Section 164 Cr.P.C. and she has supported the said allegation; she has made direct allegation against the petitioner.

5. Regard being had to the nature of allegation and material against him, I am not inclined to release the petitioner on bail. Petitioner's prayer for bail is rejected.