Mohammed Zishan vs State

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Public Prosecutor as well as learned counsel for the complainant and perused the material available on record.

The petitioner has been arrested in connection with FIR No.126/2019 of Police Station Basni, Jodhpur for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366-A, 354, 354-B I.P.C. and Section 7/8, 9(M)/10 POCSO Act and Section 3(1)(W), 2(2)(V) (Va) of SC/ST Act.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that charge-sheet has been filed against the petitioner on the basis of statements of so called eye-witnesses Hemraj and minor girl. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that now the statements of that both eye witnesses and parents of minor have been recorded before the trial court wherein they have not supported the prosecution story and turned hostile. It is also submitted that the statements of prosecutrix have already been recorded before the trial court wherein she has denied that no such incident as mentioned in the charge-sheet had taken place place. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that now the matter has been compromised between the petitioner and family of minor and, therefore, the petitioner is entitled to be released on bail.

Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application and argued that allegations against the petitioner are to the effect that he outraged modesty of minor girl of 7 years. It is submitted that the minor girl in her statement in chief has narrated the story, which she had stated in her statement recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. during the course of investigation.

Learned Public Prosecutor has further argued that the petitioner is guilty of commission of heinous crime as he attempted to outrage modesty of a minor girl of 7 years, therefore, he is not entitled to be released on bail.

Learned counsel for the complainant has not opposed the bail application and submitted that the matter has been compromised between the parties.

Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and taking into consideration the allegations of attempting to outrage modesty of minor girl of 7 years levelled against the petitioner, and looking to the nature of accusation and gravity of the offence, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am not inclined to grant bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. to the petitioner.

Accordingly, the application preferred by the petitioner under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is rejected.