Bail may be granted despite serious allegations if contradictions exist in the prosecutrix's statements and evidence is insufficient to support the charges.

ORDER :

KULDEEP MATHUR, J.

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.122/2024 registered at Police Station Kotwali Bikaner, Dist. Bikaner, for the offences under Sections 64(2)(m) and 332(b) of BNS.

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

3. Drawing attention of the Court towards the FIR and the statements of the prosecutrix ‘Z’ recorded under Section 183 BNSS, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the prosecutrix ‘Z’ who is a mature woman aged about 26 years was having a longstanding mutual relationship with the present petitioner. However, on relations between them turning strained, the petitioner has been roped in a false criminal case.

4. To substantiate this contention, learned counsel submitted that as per the prosecutrix in her statements recorded under Section 183 BNSS has stated that about three months prior to the date of lodging of the FIR, the petitioner came to her house and made her consume a cold drink containing intoxicant substance whereupon, she fell unconscious and was subjected to forcible sexual assault/rape by the present petitioner. As per the prosecutrix ‘Z’, the petitioner had also captured her obscene videos and photographs and by threatening her to circulate the same, he had committed sexual assault/rape upon her on multiple occasions.

5. Learned counsel submitted that no obscene videos and photographs allegedly captured by the petitioner to blackmail/threaten the prosecutrix have been recovered by the investigating agency; the petitioner has not even been chargesheeted for the offences under IT Act; the petitioner is in judicial custody; investigation against him has already been completed and the trial of the case will take sufficiently long time, therefore, the benefit of bail may be granted to the accused-petitioner.

6. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the complainant have vehemently opposed the bail application. Shri Mudit Vaishnav, the learned counsel for the complainant submitted that in the present case there is specific allegation that the prosecutrix ‘Z’ was subjected to forcible sexual assault/rape on multiple occasions by the petitioner. Therefore, looking to the seriousness of the accusations against the present petitioner and the gravity of offences allegedly committed by him, he does not deserve to be enlarged on bail by this Court.

7. Having considered the rival submissions, facts and circumstances of the case so also the FIR and the statements of the prosecutrix ‘Z’ recorded under Section 183 BNSS, this Court prima facie finds that there are a lot of contradictions and variations in the statements of the prosecutrix. In the FIR, the prosecutrix ‘Z’ has stated that she was having an old acquaintance with the present petitioner and she was subjected to forcible sexual assault/rape by the present petitioner on multiple occasions on the false pretext of marriage whereas the prosecutrix in her statements recorded under Section 183 BNSS has stated that three months prior to lodging of the FIR, she was made to consume a cold drink containing intoxicant substance and thereupon, the petitioner not only subjected her to forcible sexual assault/rape upon her but also captured her obscene videos and photographs.

8. This Court further prima facie finds that no obscene videos or photographs of the prosecutrix ‘Z’ allegedly captured by the petitioner have been recovered by the investigating agency. Learned Public Prosecutor has not shown any apprehension of the petitioner influencing the material prosecution witnesses of the case 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.

9. Consequently, the bail application under Section 483 BNSS is allowed. It is order