Back
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
Mr. Justice Kuldeep Mathur, J
MUKESH KUMAR – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF RAJASTHAN – Respondent
Order :
1. This application for bail under Section 483 BNSS has been filed by the petitioner who has been arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.182/2024 registered at Police Station Bidasar, Dist. Churu, for the offences under Sections 64(1) and 71 of BNS.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the prosecutrix, who is a mature woman has falsely roped the petitioner in a criminal case. Learned counsel submitted that as per the prosecutrix, she was subjected to forcible sexual assault/rape by the petitioner on multiple occasions by threatening her to viral her obscene videos and photographs.
4. Drawing attention of the Court towards the challan papers, learned counsel submitted that no obscene videos or photographs of the prosecutrix have been recovered by the investigating agency. Learned counsel submitted that as a matter of fact, the petitioner and the prosecutrix are close relatives. The prosecutrix, owing to some previous family dispute between the parties, has roped him in a false criminal case.
5. To substantiate this contention, learned counsel submit
Bail granted under Section 483 BNS Act due to lack of evidence and previous compromise in similar allegations, emphasizing the need for fair trial considerations.
Bail can be granted when there is no apprehension of influencing witnesses or tampering with evidence, and where the prosecution's case lacks sufficient material to support the allegations.
Bail may be granted despite serious allegations if contradictions exist in the prosecutrix's statements and evidence is insufficient to support the charges.
The court granted bail due to insufficient evidence supporting allegations against the petitioner, emphasizing the context of prior relationships and lack of incriminating materials.
The absence of recovered evidence and lack of risk of witness tampering justified granting bail in a case of alleged blackmail and sexual assault.
Bail may be granted when the prosecution fails to provide substantial evidence, and there is no apprehension of tampering with witnesses or fleeing from justice.
The court denied bail based on the gravity of allegations and the potential influence on witnesses, emphasizing the need for a fair trial.
The court ruled that mere pregnancy does not imply guilt of sexual assault, and the absence of risk factors justified granting bail.
Bail can be granted when the accused is in judicial custody, investigation is complete, and there is no risk of tampering with evidence or influencing witnesses.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
