MUKESH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for accused petitioners as well as learned Public Prosecutor and with their assistance perused the material made available at the time of arguments. Counsel for accused petitioners submits that as per alleged supplementary statement of the prosecutrix recorded under Section 161Cr.P.C. on 07.02.2012, specific allegation of committing offence of Section 376 IPC has been alleged against accused Mahaveer Jat, Kanhaiya Jat and Ramjas, however, the present petitioner has also been alleged to be associated.

(2.) Counsel further submits that neither statement of the prosecutrix under Section 161 Cr.P.C. nor under Section 164 Cr.P.C. were recorded, but on the basis supplementary statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. on 07.02.2012, which was recorded after two months of the alleged incident, cognizance has been taken against the present accused-petitioners. Counsel submits that charge-sheet has been filed and both the accused-petitioners are in incarceration since 07.02.2012.

(3.) Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application.