Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 209 (RAJ)

Sandeep Kumar v. State of Rajasthan

2020-01-22

MANOJ KUMAR GARG

body2020
JUDGMENT 1. The present revision petition under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner against the order dated 27.08.2019 passed by the learned Special Judge, POCSO Act Cases, Churu in Criminal Case No.74/2019, whereby the learned trial Court took cognizance against the petitioner for offences under Sections 363, 366-A, 365, 376, 382, 457, 450 R/w Section 120B IPC and Section 5/6 R/w Section 17 of POCSO Act and summoned him through arrest warrant. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after thorough investigation Police filed final report in the matter that no case is made out against the petitioner. Counsel further submits that initially the prosecutrix has not named the petitioner in her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. but later on after a considerable delay, she named the petitioner in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. Counsel submits that the order of taking cognizance is per se illegal, therefore the same deserves to be quashed and set aside. In the alternative, counsel has made a limited prayer that the arrest warrant so issued against the petitioner may be converted into bailable warrant and the petitioner is ready to appear before the trial Court. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for respondent No.2 opposed the submissions made by the counsel for the petitioner. 4. I have considered the arguments advanced before me and gone through the challan paper. 5. Initially the prosecutrix in her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. has not named the petitioner but later on she named the petitioner in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. The Police after thorough investigation has filed negative final report against the petitioner. 6. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the present case, this Court deems it appropriate to convert the arrest warrant issued by the trial court into bailable warrant of Rs.50,000/-. The petitioner is directed to appear before the trial court on or before 03.02.2020 and submit the bail bond. The trial Court shall release the petitioner on bail. If the petitioner fails to appear before the trial court within the stipulated period, then the trial Court shall issue arrest warrant against the petitioner. 7. However, looking to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, liberty is granted to the petitioner to raise all the objections before the trial court at the time of framing of charge. 8. If the petitioner fails to appear before the trial court within the stipulated period, then the trial Court shall issue arrest warrant against the petitioner. 7. However, looking to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, liberty is granted to the petitioner to raise all the objections before the trial court at the time of framing of charge. 8. The revision petition is disposed of accordingly. Stay petition is also decided accordingly.