MAHENDRA @ KANNUU GURJAR Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants have preferred these appeals aggrieved by orders dated 20.01.2018 and 21.12.2017 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Cases, Dausa whereby bail applications under Section 439 Cr.P.C., 1973 filed by the appellant were rejected.

(2.) F.I.R. No. 393/2016 was registered at Police Station Sikandara, District Dausa for offence under Sections 363, 376 (D) I.P.C. and Section 3 and 4 of POCSO Act and section 3 (2) (V), of SC/ST Act.

(3.) It is contended by the counsel for the appellant-Mahendra that prosecutrix went missing on 13.11.2017, FIR was lodged on 15.11.2016 in which there was allegation against the appellant. Thereafter, prosecutrix was recovered on 24.11.2016 from Jaipur, she was handed over to the parents on 24.11.2016 itself and her statement was recorded on 25.1.2016 by the Magistrate under Section 164 Cr.P.C., 1973 In her statement under Section 164 she stated that she called the appellant many times to come and take her away and she also mentioned in the statement that no wrong act was done by appellant-Mahendra. It is contended that thereafter her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., 1973 was again recorded by the Magistrate on direction of the High Court wherein she levelled allegation against appellant-Mahendra and appellant-Man Singh.