LRS OF CHHOTU RAM Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both these bail applications under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C. have been filed on behalf of petitioners in connection with FIR No.71/2022, registered at Police Station Rawanjna Dungar, District Sawaimadhopur, wherein they are charged for the offences punishable under Ss. 363, 366-A, 376DA, 354A and 344 IPC and Ss. 5/6, 11/12 and 16/17 of the POCSO Act.

(2.) Counsel for the petitioners submit that there are contradictions in the statements of the victim. Counsel submit that in the statement recorded under Sec. 161 Cr.P.C., the victim has levelled allegation of committing rape against Prem Prakash, who has already been granted indulgence of bail by the Coordinate Bench of this Court, hence, the same indulgence may be extended to the petitioners.

(3.) Per contra, learned PP assisted by counsel for the complainant have opposed the bail applications and submitted that the specific allegations have been levelled against the petitioner Devkinandan. They further submit that the victim is minor and the consent of a minor is no consent in the eye of law. They further submit that the case of the petitioners is distinguishable with the case of co-accused Prem Prakash, hence, the petitioners are not entitled to get bail.