The court established that significant contradictions in witness statements can influence the decision to grant bail, particularly when balanced against the age and circumstances of the accused.

JUDGMENT

Dr. Pushpendra Singh Bhati, J. - In wake of second surge in the COVID-19 cases, abundant caution is being maintained, while hearing the matters in Court, for the safety of all concerned.

2. This Court perused the material available on record.

3. The petitioner has been arrested in connection with FIR No.174/2021 of Police Station Hindoli, District Bundi for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366A, 376(2)(N) IPC and Section 5/6 of POCSO Act. He has preferred this bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of this Court towards the statement rendered by the prosecutrix under Section 161 Cr.P.C. in which the prosecutrix has stated that she is 16 years 07 months of age and she was in consistent contact with the present petitioner, as they were speaking on mobile phone. Learned counsel further submits that the prosecutrix has further stated that the petitioner called her on mobile phone and when she refused, the petitioner took her away on his motorcycle and committed rape upon her. Learned counsel also has further drawn the attention of this Court to the statement rendered by the prosecutrix under Section 164 Cr.P.C. in which the prosecutrix completely changed her stand and stated that she was being sold by the accused-petitioner and other male members and many new allegations have been levelled. Learned counsel has also shown the number of chats and photographs of the petitioner and the prosecutrix.

5. Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application.

6. Looking into the major contradictions in the statements under Sections 161 & 164 Cr.P.C., the petitioner is in custody since 10.06.2021 and also the fact that the petitioner is a young boy aged 21 years, this Court is of the opinion that at this stage, the custody of the petitioner in this case is not warranted.

7. Thus, having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case as also the fact that conclusion of the proceedings is likely to take some time and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court deems it just and proper to grant bail to the accused petitioner under Section 439 Cr.P.C.

8. Accordingly, this bail application filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is directed that petitioner Parasram S/o Bhanwar Lal shall be released on bail in connection with FIR No.174/2021 of Police Station Hindoli, District Bundi provided he executes a personal bond in a sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sound and solvent sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of learned trial court for his appearance before that court on each and every date of hearing and whenever called upon to do so till the completion of the trial.