Jagdish. Vs. the State of Rajasthan.

Jagdish. vs The State of Rajasthan.

Type Court Judgment Court Rajasthan Jaipur Decided Apr 26, 2011

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/917143

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/917143
Court: Rajasthan Jaipur High Court
Judge: Mohammad Rafiq, J.
Decided On: Apr 26, 2011
Case Number: S.B. Cr. Misc. Bail Application No.3338/2011.
Subject: Criminal

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

[MR.JUSTICE B.V.PINTO, J.] This CRL.A filed u/s.374(2) CR.P.C. by the advocate for the appellant against the judgment dt. 14.7.05 passed by the dist. & SJ., fast track court II, shimoga, in s.c.no,71/02 -convicting the appellant/accused for the offence p/u/s.326 of IPC and sentencing him to undergo S.I. for 5 years ...

Key legal issue: Criminal
Acts & sections: Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) - Sections 161, 164, 439; Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 363, 366, 376, 342

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Jagdish.

Advocate Shri Harendra Singh Sinsinwar, Adv.

Respondent

The State of Rajasthan.

Advocate Shri Sanjeev Kumar Mahala, Adv.

Legal References

Acts: Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) - Sections 161, 164, 439; Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 363, 366, 376, 342

Excerpt

[mr.justice b.v.pinto, j.] this crl.a filed u/s.374(2) cr.p.c. by the advocate for the appellant against the judgment dt. 14.7.05 passed by the dist. & sj., fast track court ii, shimoga, in s.c.no,71/02 -convicting the appellant/accused for the offence p/u/s.326 of ipc and sentencing him to undergo s.i. for 5 years and to pay a fine of rs.3000/- i.d., s.i. for 6 months for the offence p/u/s.326 of ipc......about rape but totality of statement especially when she says that she travelled various places with the petitioner and did not raise any protest, proves that she remained with petitioner at her own free will. challan has been filed. petitioner is in jail since 10.09.2010. 4. there is no other criminal case ever registered against the petitioner. learned public prosecutor opposed the bail application.5. after considering all the facts and circumstances of the case and without expressing any opinion on its merits and demerits, i deem it just and proper to allow this bail application. it is therefore ordered that accused-petitioner, namely, jagdish son of mangilal dhobi, resident of ratlai, police station bakani, district jhalawar (presently confined in district jail jhalawar) be released on bail under section 439 cr.p.c., in fir no.157/2010, police station bakani, district jhalawar, under sections 363, 366, 376 and 342 of the ipc, provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of rs.50,000/- with two sureties of rs.25000/- each to the satisfaction of the trial court for his appearance on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.6. however, in case it is found that any other criminal case is pending against petitioner and that misstatement has been made about his whereabouts or non-registration of any other criminal case or any new case in future is registered against him, the bail so granted to him by this court in this bail application would be liable to be cancelled at the instance of prosecution even by the trial court and stipulation to this effect shall be inserted in bail bonds produced by petitioner, and sureties to be produced in support thereof shall be verified by tehsildar of area concerned. 7. the bail application stands disposed of.

Full Judgment

1. Heard learned counsel for petitioner as well as learned Public Prosecutor and perused material made available to me during course of arguments. Contention of learned counsel for petitioner is that prosecutrix is a married woman.

2. According to medical-examination-report, her age is in between 17-19 years. In her statements recorded under Sections 161 and 164 of the Cr.P.C. she did not make any allegation of rape against petitioner, although she stated that she accompanied petitioner at her own free will and went with him to different places, namely, Bhilwara, Jodhpur, Ramdeora and Itawa, and they stayed together in different hotels/Inns. In court statement again she repeated same averments about her visit to different places along-with petitioner.

3. Tenor of her statement clearly shows that she was a consenting party and had voluntarily gone with petitioner. In one statement though she sought to suggest about rape but totality of statement especially when she says that she travelled various places with the petitioner and did not raise any protest, proves that she remained with petitioner at her own free will. Challan has been filed. Petitioner is in jail since 10.09.2010.

4. There is no other criminal case ever registered against the petitioner. Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application.

5. After considering all the facts and circumstances of the case and without expressing any opinion on its merits and demerits, I deem it just and proper to allow this bail application. It is therefore ordered that accused-petitioner, namely, Jagdish Son of Mangilal Dhobi, Resident of Ratlai, Police Station Bakani, District Jhalawar (presently confined in District Jail Jhalawar) be released on bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C., in FIR No.157/2010, Police Station Bakani, District Jhalawar, under Sections 363, 366, 376 and 342 of the IPC, provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25000/- each to the satisfaction of the trial court for his appearance on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.

6. However, in case it is found that any other criminal case is pending against petitioner and that misstatement has been made about his whereabouts or non-registration of any other criminal case or any new case in future is registered against him, the bail so granted to him by this court in this bail application would be liable to be cancelled at the instance of prosecution even by the trial court and stipulation to this effect shall be inserted in bail bonds produced by petitioner, and sureties to be produced in support thereof shall be verified by Tehsildar of area concerned.

7. The bail application stands disposed of.

Same Court & Year Rajasthan Jaipur · 2011 Same Parties Jagdish. vs The State of Rajasthan. Same Subject Criminal Same Judge Mohammad Rafiq, J. Acts & Sections Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) - Sections 161, 164, 439; I...

Criminal