YUSAF KHAN 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 connection with FIR No. 42/2018 of Police Station Jamba, District Jodhpur for the offences punishable under Ss. 354-A, 365, 366, 386 and 376 I.P.C. He has preferred this bail application under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. It is submitted that as a matter of fact, on 2/11/2018, the prosecutrix went to her uncle's house from her in-laws' house and remained there for some days. It is submitted that father-in-law of the prosecutrix lodged a missing person report at Police Station Jamba on 4/11/2018 alleging that his daughter-in-law is missing from 2/11/2018. It is argued that the prosecutrix along with her parents appeared before the police at Nachna and the Police Station, Jamba have recorded their statements wherein they have specifically stated that the prosecutrix went to her uncle's house on 2/11/2018 and nobody had abducted her. The prosecutrix in her statements has specifically stated that she went to her uncle's house as per her own free will and nobody had abducted her. Thereafter on 3/12/2018, the prosecutrix filed a complaint in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Phalodi alleging that on 2/11/2018, the petitioner had abducted her and thereafter sexually assaulted her. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that allegations of abduction and sexual assault are absolutely false and are afterthought. It is argued that the prosecutrix came to the house of the petitioner as per her own free will but now she has filed this false complaint against him under pressure of her inlaws. It is submitted that charge-sheet has been filed and trial of the case will take time.