PRAHLAD SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two petitions under S.482, Cr. P.C. have been filed by the accused against the two orders of the learned Sessions Judge, Merta City each dated 14-9-1988. Since the original orders by the Munsiff and Judicial Magistrate, Ladnu were passed at different stages in one and the same criminal case, they were heard together and are decided by a single order. By one impugned order, the learned Sessions Judge cancelled the bail under S.439(2), Cr. P.C. granted to the accused by the learned Munsiff and Judicial Magistrate, Ladnu. By the other impugned order, the learned Sessions Judge quashed the order of the Magistrate dated 4-10-87 by which the Magistrate refused to take cognizance of the offences under Ss.457 and 376, I.P.C. and instead took cognizance of the offence under S.448, I.P.C.

(2.) For a proper appreciation of the controversies involved, it would be proper to notice the material facts in brief.

(3.) Smt. Samander Kanwar, the prosecutric appeared at Police Station, Ladnu on 11-9-1987 and presented a written report stating therein that when she was sleeping on the roof of her house in village Gudila in the night between 8th and 9th September, 1987, accused Prahlad Singh at about 11 p.m. stealthily entered her house and over powered her. He thereafter committed rape on her. She could not raise cries as the accused threatened to kill her. After committing the crime, the accused slipped away. She raised cries and many persons collected out-side her house. The Police registered a case under Ss.376 and 457, I.P.C. and proceeded with the investigation. The accused was arrested around 8 a.m. on 16-9-1987 and was presented before the Judicial Magistrate, Ladnu on the same day. He remanded him to judicial custody. The accused moved an application for bail before the Magistrate on 17-9-1987. The learned Magistrate after hearing the public prosecutor and the counsel for the accused on 17-9-1987 itself, allowed the application and passed an order to release him on bail on furnishing personal and surety bonds each in the amount of Rs. 5000/-. The prosecutrix approached the Sessions Judge under S.439(2), Cr. P.C. and prayed for cancellation of bail of the accused granted to him by the Magistrate. While the proceedings for cancellation of bail were pending before the learned Sessions Judge, the police submitted a challan against the accused on 12-10-1987. The case was taken up on 14-10-87 by the Magistrate. It was contended before him on behalf of the accused that from the evidence and material collected during investigation by the police, no offence under Ss.376 and 457, I.P.C. could be said to have been made out. The magistrate heard the A.P.P. and the counsel for the accused. By his impugned order dated 14-10-1987 he allowed the contention raised on behalf of the accused. As a result, he refused to take cognizance of the offences under Ss.376 and 457, I.P.C. and instead took cognizance of the offence under S.448, I.P.C. The prosecutrix again went in revision before the learned Sessions Judge and challenged the order of the Magistrate.