Bail may be granted when there is no incriminating evidence, and the accused has been in custody for an extended period.

Order :

1. The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 BNSS on behalf of the accused-petitioner. The accused-petitioner has been arrested in connection with FIR No.442/2024 registered at Police Station Sadar Hindoun, District Karauli, for the offence(s) under Sections 64(1) & 351(2) of BNS and Sections 67 & 67a of IT Act.

2. Learned counsel for the accused-petitioner submits that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits prior to the filing of the present FIR, the accused- petitioner's brother lodged a different FIR against the husband of the prosecutrix and other persons about causing injuries to the accused-petitioner and in that matter investigation is still pending. It is also contended that the present FIR has been lodged by the complainant after an inordinate delay of 7 months. It is also contended that the prosecutrix in the FIR as well as in the statements rendered under Sections 180 and 183 of BNSS has levelled charges under Information and Technology Act alleging that the accused-petitioner on the pretext of circulating her obscene photographs, committed rape with her. However, the police did not find allegations levelled in the FIR as true and gave negative final report regarding the said offences. The accused- petitioner is in custody since long and trial of the case will take considerable time, therefore, the bail may be granted to the accused-petitioner.

3. Learned Public Prosecutor as well as learned counsel for the complainant vehemently opposed the bail application and contended that the prosecutrix in her statement rendered under Sections 180 and 183 of BNSS has clearly stated that the accused-petitioner committed rape with her, therefore, the bail application of the accused-petitioner deserves to be dismissed.

4. Heard and perused the material available on record.

5. Considering the arguments advanced by the counsel for the parties and looking to the fact that the FIR itself is delayed and prior to the FIR, the case was registered against the husband of the prosecutrix for causing injuries to the accused-petitioner. There are no incriminating material recovered from the accused- petitioner's mobile phone regarding circulating the obscene photographs of the prosecutrix, therefore, without further commenting anything on the merits of the case, I deem it just and proper to enlarge the accused-petitioner on bail.

6. Accordingly, this bail application under Section 483 BNSS is allowed and it is ordered that the accused-petitioner Kaptan S/o Lachhi Ram in connection with FIR No.442/2024 registered at Police Station Sadar Hindoun, District Karauli, shall be enlarged on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for his appearance before the court concerned on all the dates of hearing as and when called upon to do so.