SADHNA CHAUDHARY versus THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR.

SADHNA CHAUDHARY versus THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR.

Considering the seriousness of the offences alleged, the fact that recoveries (obscene photos/videos, mobile phone and other articles) were yet to be made and that respondent no.2 had not fully cooperated with the investigation, and given his position as a police officer which warrants stricter scrutiny, the High Court erred in accepting the accused's account and granting anticipatory bail; the anticipatory bail order was therefore set aside and the application dismissed.

Parties
Appellant / Complainant / Victim / Prosecutrix: Sadhna Chaudhary; Respondent / State: State of Rajasthan; Respondent / Accused / Station House Officer: Kanwar Pal Singh
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
12 July 2022
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal (criminal Appeal No. 936 of 2022) / Appeal Against High Court Order Granting Anticipatory Bail Under Section 438 Cr PC
Outcome
Appeal allowed; High Court order dated 25.08.2021 granting anticipatory bail set aside; anticipatory bail application dismissed
Legal Topics
Anticipatory Bail, Section 438 Cr PC, Sexual Offences (section 376 Ipc), Obscene Material and Recovery of Evidence, Investigation and Cooperation With Police
Criminal Law Criminal Procedure Evidence Anticipatory Bail Section 438 Cr PC Sexual Offences (section 376 Ipc) Obscene Material and Recovery of Evidence Investigation and Cooperation With Police

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sadhna Chaudhary

Appellant / Complainant / Victim / Prosecutrix

State of Rajasthan

Respondent / State

Kanwar Pal Singh

Respondent / Accused / Station House Officer

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal (criminal Appeal No. 936 of 2022) / Appeal Against High Court Order Granting Anticipatory Bail Under Section 438 Cr PC

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC should be granted to respondent no.2 (a police officer) accused of offences under Sections 376, 323, 341, 354 and 379 IPC
  2. 2 Whether the High Court erred in accepting the accused's version and granting anticipatory bail despite ongoing investigation and recoveries yet to be made
  3. 3 Whether the accused's position as a police officer warrants stricter scrutiny in considering anticipatory bail

Ratio Decidendi

Considering the seriousness of the offences alleged, the fact that recoveries (obscene photos/videos, mobile phone and other articles) were yet to be made and that respondent no.2 had not fully cooperated with the investigation, and given his position as a police officer which warrants stricter scrutiny, the High Court erred in accepting the accused's account and granting anticipatory bail; the anticipatory bail order was therefore set aside and the application dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; High Court order dated 25.08.2021 granting anticipatory bail set aside; anticipatory bail application dismissed

Orders

  • Impugned judgment and order of the High Court dated 25.08.2021 is set aside
  • Application under Section 438 CrPC filed by respondent no.2 is dismissed