HARSH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Public Prosecutor and also perused the material on record.

(2.) The petitioner has been arrested in FIR No. 6/2019 of Police Station Kalandri, District Sirohi for the offences punishable under Ss. 363, 366 and 376 of the Indian PenalCode and under Sec. 3/4 of POCSO Act. He has preferred this bail application under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. It is argued that from the documentary evidence collected during the course of investigation, the date of birth of the prosecution is 14/2/2001 and as per the same, it is clear that she was 17 years and 11 months of the age on the date of incident. It is submitted that the allegations of kidnapping and sexual assault levelled against the petitioner are false because as per the story narrated by the prosecutrix, it is impossible that the petitioner had abducted the prosecutrix in the presence of all the family members and thereafter kept her in confinement at various places. Learned counsel has submitted that from the statements of the prosecutrix recorded during the course of investigation, it is clear that she stayed with the petitioner at Jodhpur and Sumerpur etc. for around two days and from the statement of the Manager of the Hotel, it is also clear that both of them stayed for one night in a hotel as per their own free will. Learned counsel has submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed and the trial of the case will take a long time, therefore, it is prayed that the petitioner may be enlarged on bail.