SANWAR LAL BALAI 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.109/2019 of Police Station Asind, Bhilwara for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 376 IPC and 3/4 of POCSO Act. He has preferred this bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that after rejection of the second bail application of the petitioner, statements of the prosecutrix and her parents have been recorded. It is submitted that from the evidence of the prosecutrix, it is clear that the complaint regarding the alleged incident of sexual assault was lodged with delay of four days. It is submitted that the prosecutrix in her evidence has admitted that though she had opportunity to tell about the incident to various other persons soon after the said incident but she did not disclose it to anybody. It is submitted that though the police have concluded that on the date of the incident, the prosecutrix was minor but parents of the prosecutrix in their statements have specifically admitted that they did not know the exact date of birth of the prosecutrix and got her date of birth recorded in the school record as per their guess. It is further submitted that as a matter of fact, the prosecutrix and the petitioner were in relation; the prosecutrix went to attend a programme in the night and during that programme, she went with the petitioner for around one hour as per her own free will. It is also submitted that when she returned to the programme, some persons present there, saw her and made a complaint to the parents of the prosecutrix, then they pressurized the prosecutrix to complain against the petitioner.