High CourtsSingle Bench(2020) 08 GUJ CK 0023

Abdullah Vali Umar Patel vs State Of Gujarat

Gujarat High Court · Decided on 5 August 2020

HON’BLE JUDGES
Bela M. Trivedi, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
R/Criminal Misc.Application No. 8832 Of 2020

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

15 paragraphs · 297 words

Bela M. Trivedi, J

1.

The present application has been filed by the applicant â€" original accused seeking his release on bail under section 439 of Cr.P.C in connection

with the FIR being C.R. No. 11199003200099 registered at Aamod Police Station, Bharuch for the offence punishable under section 376(2)(f), 376(2)

(j), 376(2) (k), 376(2)(l), 376(2)(n), 506(1) of the IPC, and section 4, 6, 8, 12 of the POCSO Act as well as Section 506 and 376(3) of the IPC.

2.

The complaint has been filed by the complainant Jarinaben on 11.03.2020, alleging inter alia that her daughter studying in Std. VII at the Madresa

was molested and raped by the accused who was the Molvi in the said Madresa during the period from 01.01.2018 to 31.12.2019.

3.

The learned advocate Mr. Majmudar for the applicant submitted that there was a gross delay in lodging the FIR and the applicant has been falsely

implicated for extraneous reasons.

4.

However, the learned APP has resisted the application by submitting that considering the allegations made in the complaint which are of very

serious in nature, the present application may not be granted.

5.

Having regard to the submissions made by the learned advocates for the parties and the documents on record, more particularly the complaint, it

appears that the complainant has made very serious allegations against the present applicant who was the Molvi in the Madresa, where the victim who

was minor, was studying. Without elaborating further the allegations, suffice it to say that considering the said allegations and the position of the

applicant in the Madresa as well as the age of the victim, the Court is not inclined to grant the present application.

6.

In that view of the matter, the present application is rejected. Rule is discharged.