Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 1515 (RAJ)

Shivkumar @ Pandit v. State of Rajasthan

2019-05-15

VIJAY BISHNOI

body2019
JUDGMENT 1. This criminal appeal under Section 14A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter to be referred as the SC/ST Act) has been filed on behalf of the appellant being aggrieved with the order dated 27.04.2019 passed by the Special Judge, POCSO Act Cases, Merta (hereinafter to be referred as trial court) in Criminal Misc. Case No. 34/2019, whereby the trial court has dismissed the bail application filed on behalf of the appellant. 2. The appellant has been arrested in FIR No. 158/2018 of Police Station Chitawa, District Nagaur for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366, 376(2)(J)(N) and 376(3) IPC and Section 3(2)(v)(va) SC/ST Act. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the appellant has falsely been implicated in this case and the police have filed charge-sheet against him under the POCSO Act without ascertaining the correct age of the prosecutrix. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the police have concluded that on the date of incident the age of the prosecutrix was around 13 years and 8 months while relying upon the certificate issued by the Adarsh Government Girls Higher Secondary School, Kukanwali, Nagaur. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the said certificate was issued on 19.12.2018, in which the date of birth of the prosecutrix is mentioned as 01.02.2005 while certifying that she took admission in 7th Standard on 28.08.2014. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that as per the said certificate the prosecutrix took admission in the 7th Standard at the age of 9 years which is quite impossible. Learned counsel for the appellant has also submitted that the police have not conducted ossification test for ascertaining the correct age of prosecutrix. It is argued that as a matter of fact the prosecutrix is major and relation between her and the appellant were consensual. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the prosecutrix eloped with the appellant as per her own free will and lived with him for about 10 to 15 days at Ahmedabad. It is also submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed and the trial of the case will take time. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the prayer made on behalf of the appellant in this criminal appeal. 5. It is also submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed and the trial of the case will take time. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the prayer made on behalf of the appellant in this criminal appeal. 5. Heard learned counsel for the appellant as well as learned Public Prosecutor and also perused the material on record. 6. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I deem it just and proper to allow the appeal filed by the accused appellant under Section 14-A(2) of SC/ST Act. 7. Accordingly, this criminal appeal filed under Section 14-A(2) of SC/ST Act is allowed and the order dated 27.04.2019 passed by the Special Judge, POCSO Act Cases, Merta in Criminal Misc. Case No. 34/2019 is set aside. It is directed that appellant - Shivkumar @ Pandit S/o Ram Kumar shall be released on bail in connection with FIR No. 158/2018 of Police Station Chitawa, District Nagaur provided he executes a personal bond in a sum of Rs. 50,000/- with two sound and solvent sureties of Rs. 25,000/- each to the satisfaction of learned trial court for his appearance before that court on each and every date of hearing and whenever called upon to do so till the completion of the trial.