High Court rejects bail of two in Gang Rape case

Jammu, AUG.-12:- State High Court rejected the bail applications of Rahspal Singh & Other in Gang Rape case.
According to police case is that on 05.03.2015 the prosecutrix, a lady aged 40 years, was on her way to the house of her uncle. When she reached near Village, Ratti Chappdi, the petitioners and another, namely, Balwant Singh reached near her by a Balero vehicle bearing registration No. JK02AJ-3559. They stopped their vehicle and asked the prosecutrix to come inside. On her refusal they forcibly pulled her into the vehicle. They attempted to compel her to submit herself for commission of sexual intercourse by them, brandishing a weapon called 'Khokri'. On her refusal, they drove the vehicle to an isolated place in bushes where they brought out a mat from the vehicle, spread it on the ground, made the prosecutrix to lie on the said mat and committed rape on her one after the other. After committing rape on her, they threatened her with dire consequences if she narrates the incident to anyone and left the scene. The prosecutrix returned to her house and reached there at 7 PM. She narrated the whole story to her mother-in-law and after that they approached Police Station, Gharota, where they reached at 8.30 PM. The SHO of the Police Station was not available at the Police Station and the other police personnel asked her to come on the next day. On the next day, she filed a complaint in the court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jammu and the FIR was then registered in terms of Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. 4. In seeking their release on bail after refusal by the trial court, it is contended by the petitioners that they are old persons of more than 60 years in age, they have been falsely implicated and are languishing in jail from the last more than two years.
Justice Janak Raj Kotwal after hearing Adv GS Thakur for the petitioners whereas Govt Advocate Sanjeev Padha appearing for the state observed that petitioners cannot be applied in a bail application as the same is based on the analysis of the evidence of the prosecutrix at final judgment stage and it is too well known that criteria of appreciating the evidence/material at bail stage is different than the criteria at the final judgment stage and in view of the evidence of the prosecutrix as prosecution witness before the trial court, in my considered view, rigor of proviso to section 497-C is strongly attracted in this case inasmuch as it cannot be said that accusation against the petitioners is not 'prima facie true'. With these observations Court rejected the bail application.