- (1.) Leave granted.
(2.) Challenge in this appeal is to the order passed by a learned Single Judge of the Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench dismissing the application for grant of leave to question correctness of the judgment of learned Additional District Sessions Judge (Fast track), No. 2 Alwar.
(3.) Background facts in a nutshell are as follows: Respondents were facing the trial for alleged commission of offence punishable under Section 342 and 376(2) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short the IPC ). PW1 was the victim. The trial court noticed that it was the accused Chandan who committed rape on her. There was no allegation of rape against the other accused persons namely Hemraj and Smt. Kamla. The accused Chandan was facing trial under the provisions of Juvenile Justice Act, 2000 (in short the Juvenile Act ). The trial court as noted above held the accused Hemraj guilty of offence punishable under Section 342 IPC and held that the Accused Kamla cannot be convicted in terms of Section 376(2) IPC. The State filed an appeal questioning acquittal of the respondent from the accusations relatable to Section 376(2) IPC. The High Court held that so far as the accused Hemraj is concerned his presence at the spot was doubtful. In any event both the respondents cannot be held guilty of offence punishable under Section 376(2) IPC.;