The lack of specific allegations and lack of support from a key witness can be influential factors in granting bail.

Headnote:
Bail Application - Section 439 Cr.P.C. - The court allowed the bail application of the petitioner, who was in custody for offenses under various sections of the IPC, POCSO Act 2012, and IT Act, based on the lack of rape allegations and the statement of the key witness not supporting the prosecution case.
Fact of the Case:

The petitioner filed a second bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. as the first application was rejected, citing the statement of a key witness not supporting the prosecution case.
Finding of the Court:

The court, upon consideration of the arguments, found that the bail application deserved to be accepted and allowed the petitioner's release on bail.
Issues: The key issues revolved around the lack of rape allegations against the petitioner and the statement of the key witness not supporting the prosecution case.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the lack of rape allegations against the petitioner and the key witness's statement not supporting the prosecution case.
Final Decision: The court allowed the second bail application and ordered the release of the accused-petitioner on bail upon fulfilling certain conditions.

JUDGMENT

Vinit Kumar Mathur, J. - Notice of the bail application has been served upon respondent No. 2. However, nobody has put in appearance on behalf of respondent No. 2.

2. The factual report submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor is taken on record.

3. The present second bail application has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. on behalf of the petitioner who is in custody in connection with F.I.R. No.06/2022, Police Station Bhadesar, District Chittorgarh for the offences under Sections 376(3), 363, 341, 504, 354-a IPC and Sections 3, 4, 11 of POCSO act 2012 and Section 67-a IT act.

4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the first bail application of the petitioner was rejected by this court vide order dated 22.02.2022 with liberty to file a fresh bail application after the statement of Mst 'N' is recorded before the trial court. Learned counsel submits that the statement of Mst 'N' has been recorded before the trial court as PW-1 and she has not supported the prosecution case to the extent of the petitioner, therefore, she has been declared hostile. Learned counsel submits that even otherwise, there is no allegation of rape against the petitioner in the present case. Therefore, it is prayed that the petitioner may be enlarged on bail.

6. The learned Public Prosecutor opposes the bail.

7. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and upon a consideration of the arguments advanced, this Court is of the opinion that the bail application filed by the petitioner deserves to be accepted.

8. Consequently, the second bail application filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed. It is ordered that the accused-petitioner Kushal Sen S/o Madhavlal Sen arrested in connection with F.I.R. No. 06/2022, Police Station Bhadesar, District Chittorgarh shall be released on bail; provided he furnishes a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees: Fifty Thousand Only) with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees : Twenty Five Thousand Only) each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court with the stipulation to appear before that Court on all dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document