Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2021 DIGILAW 1453 (RAJ)

Vikram v. State Of Rajasthan

2021-08-11

SANDEEP MEHTA

body2021
JUDGMENT Sandeep Mehta, J. - Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned Public Prosecutor, learned counsel for the complainant and perused the material available on record. 2. The instant appeal has been filed under Section 14-A SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act on behalf of the appellant, who is in custody in connection with F.I.R. No.160/2020 registered at the Police Station Kotra, District Udaipur for the offences under Sections 370-A, 120-B and 376 IPC and Section 3(2)(5) of the SC/ST Act, against the order dated 26.05.2021 passed by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act Cases, Udaipur in Criminal Misc. Case No.985/2021, whereby the bail application preferred under Section 439 Cr.P.C. on behalf of the appellant was rejected. 3. I have heard and considered the submissions advanced by learned counsel Mr. Rajendra Singh Rathore, representing the appellant, learned Public Prosecutor and Mr. J.V.S. Deora, representing the complainant, and have gone through the material available on record. 4. The prosecutrix Mst. 'G' was allegedly abducted from her father's house by one Amrit in the month of September 2020. The FIR came to be registered in the month of November 2020 by Devilal alleging that his daughter was abducted by Amrit and she was taken to Gujarat and he thereafter subjected her to rape for 10-15 days. Amrit was apprehended by the police, on which, Mst. 'G' was left to fend for herself. Co-accused Nuriya, his wife and daughter Kali came and took Mst. 'G' to Ramgarh and allegedly sold her to the appellant herein, who also subjected her to rape. However, there are available on record photographs of marriage ceremony of the appellant with the prosecutrix. The petitioner himself has filed a report to the SHO, Police Station Vadnagar alleging that the parents of the girl approached him in the month of November 2020 and married the girl to him after taking money. At that time, the girl's name was given out to be Parul. The girl, however, ditched him and went away in a clandestine manner. Thus, the appellant himself has taken a defence of being cheated into the marriage with the prosecutrix. Admittedly, the prosecutrix came back from Gujarat in the month of October 2020, but despite available opportunities, the FIR came to be lodged after a gross delay. 5. The girl, however, ditched him and went away in a clandestine manner. Thus, the appellant himself has taken a defence of being cheated into the marriage with the prosecutrix. Admittedly, the prosecutrix came back from Gujarat in the month of October 2020, but despite available opportunities, the FIR came to be lodged after a gross delay. 5. In this view of the matter and having regard to the over all facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the appellant deserves indulgence of bail and thus, the order rejecting the application for bail filed on behalf of the appellant cannot be sustained. 6. Consequently, the instant appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated 26.05.2021 passed by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act Cases, Udaipur in Criminal Misc. Case No.985/2021 is set aside. It is ordered that the accused-appellant Vikram S/o Virsang Thakor arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.160/2020 registered at the Police Station Kotra, District Udaipur shall be released on bail; provided he furnishes a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- and two surety bonds of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court with the stipulation to appear before that Court on all dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.