Kunwar Pal vs State of Rajasthan

I.S. Israni, J.—Heard. The matter was heard for final disposal with consent of both the parties. It is submitted by Mr. Biri Singh, learned Counsel, that, initially, a case u/s 376, IPC, was registered against the petitioner, regarding the incident, which took place on 7.4.85. FIR was lodged on 9.4.85. Thereafter, an offence was committed by the accused u/s 354, IPC, and he was released on bail by the Investigating officer. However, the eelier bail was cancelled and the offence was converted to have been committed u/s 376/511, 354/451 and 323, IPC. It is submitted that the statement of proxecutrix Mst. Kamla was recorded on 1.8.90. The statement was read-over by the learned Counsel. From this statement, it is evident that she only says that she suspects the petitioner to have committed rape, because she found the petitioner loitering out-side her house, few days earlier.

It is further submitted by the learned Counsel that on 1.8.90, after recording the above statement of the prosecutrix, the trial court has directed that standing warrant be issued against the petitioner. It is also stated that this order for issue of standing warrant was given on 23.9.89. However, warrant was not issued. It is pointed out that the petitioner is absconding.

It is evident from the statment of Mst. Kamla that she has only suspicion against the petitioner. Moreover, as stated by the learned Counsel, the petitioner is prepared to surrender himself before the court also and is not absconding. Reliance has been placed on Babu v. State of Rajasthan RLR 1989 (2) 854.

In the circumstances, I feel it appropriate and in the interest of justice to convert the standing warrant, directed to have been issued vide orders dated 29.3.90 and 1.8.90, provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 5,000/- with one surety in the like amount.

The petition stands disposed of, as above.