X Vs. STATE
LAWS(RAJ)-2021-7-40
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN
Decided on July 01,2021

X Appellant
VERSUS
STATE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

SANDEEP MEHTA,J. - (1.) Though this Court had directed the learned Public Prosecutor by order dated 17.06.2021 to get the notices of the respondent No.2 complainant served through the SHO concerned. But till date, compliance has not been made.
(2.) Learned Public Prosecutor has raised a preliminary objection that the revision cannot be decided in absence of notice to the complainant respondent No.2 Mani Lal.
(3.) I have considered the said submission in light of the relevant legal provisions. It may be stated here that Sections 12, 101 and 102 of the Juvenile Justice Act are the provisions dealing with the prayer for bail made on behalf of the CICL at different stages.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.