w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n



Raj Kumar v/s State of Rajasthan

    Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 3900 of 2015

    Decided On, 05 May 2015

    At, High Court of Rajasthan

    By, THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N. BHANDARI

    For the Petitioner: Ashvin Garg, Advocate. For the Respondent: Virendra Godara, P.P.



Judgment Text

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.

2. Learned counsel submits that so far as petitioner is concerned, all

Please Login To View The Full Judgment!

gation does not exist for commission of rape. The allegation aforesaid exist against Rahul. It is further stated that there is contradiction in the story given in the FIR and statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. The prosecutrix said to have remained with Rahul for one month. She took her jewellery while leaving Rahul. She came to Laxmangarh thereafter by travelling to various places, as stated under Section 164 Cr.P.C., thus petitioner may be granted bail. It is moreso when nothing is to be recovered from the petitioner as jewellery was taken back by the prosecutrix herself.3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application.4. After considering rival submissions of the parties and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, which may otherwise affect outcome of the trial, looking to the facts of this case, I am of the view that the petitioner deserves to be enlarged on bail. Accordingly, bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed. It is ordered that the accused-petitioner Raj Kumar S/o Ramveer Singh in FIR No.253/2013, registered with Police Station Laxmangarh, District Alwar be released on bail; provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of L30,000/- together with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial court for his appearance before the court on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.Bail application allowed.
OR

Already A Member?

Also