The court granted bail due to the lack of evidence against the petitioner and the consensual nature of the relationship with the victim, emphasizing no risk of influencing witnesses.

ORDER :

(KULDEEP MATHUR, J.)

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.151/2024 registered at Police Station Diver, District Rajsamand, for the offences under Sections 64(1) of IPC and Section 3/4 of POCSO Act.

2. Drawing attention of the Court towards the FIR and challan papers, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the victim ‘M’ who is aged about 17 years and 11 months has falsely roped the present petitioner in a criminal case. To substantiate this contention, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that on 01.08.2024, the victim ‘M’ voluntarily travelled with the present petitioner using public transportation to Udaipur and took a room on rent. She thereupon entered into consensual relationship with the petitioner. Learned counsel submitted that though as per the prosecution, the petitioner had captured her obscene videos and photographs and threatened her to make the same viral on social media platform but no such videos and photographs of the victim have been recovered by the investigating agency. Learned counsel submitted that as a matter of fact the petitioner has not even been charge-sheeted for the offences under Information Technology Act, 2000 .

3. Lastly, learned counsel submitted that the petitioner who is aged about 23 years is in judicial custody since 25.11.2024; the investigation against him has already been completed and the challan against him has already been filed before the competent Criminal Court and the trial of the case will take sufficiently long time, therefore, the benefit of bail may be granted to the accused-petitioner.

4. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application.

5. Heard learned counsel for the parties at Bar. Perused the material available on record.

6. Having considered the rival submissions, facts and circumstances of the case and having perused the material available on record, this Court prima facie finds that the argument of learned counsel for the petitioner that the victim, who was aged about 17 years and 11 months at the time of alleged incident was in consensual relationship with present petitioner, cannot be brushed aside at this stage. This Court also prima facie finds that no obscene videos and photographs of the victim have been recovered by the investigating agency and the petitoner has not even been charge-sheeted for the offences under Information Technology Act, 2000 . This Court also prima facie finds that the prosecution has not shown any apprehension of the petitioner influencing the victim or remaining material prosecution witnesses or fleeing away from justice or tampering with the evidence, in case he is enlarged on bail. Thus, without expressing any opinion on merits/demerits of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

7. Consequently, the bail application under Section 483 BNSS is allowed. It is ordered that the accused-petitioner Rajulal S/o Shri Tulsiram arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.151/2024 registered at Police Station Diver, District Rajsamand, shall be released on bail, if not wanted in any other case, provided he furnishes a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- and two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each, to the satisfaction of learned trial court, for his appearance before that court on each & every date of hearing and whenever called upon to do so till completion of the trial.

8. It is however, made clear that findings recorded/observations made above are for limited purposes of adjudication of bail application. The trial court shall not get prejudiced by the same.