The court granted bail based on the lack of supporting evidence from key witnesses, significantly reducing the likelihood of conviction.

Order :

1. This application for bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C . (483 BNSS) has been filed by the petitioner who has been arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.10/2024, registered at Police Station Bakhasar, District Barmer for offences under Sections 450 , 376(2) (f) and 305 of IPC ; Sections 5/6 of POCSO Act.

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

3. Drawing attention of the Court towards the FIR, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that as per the prosecution, the victim- ‘L’ was subjected to forcible sexual assault- rape by the present petitioner. The victim- ‘L’ had committed suicide by jumping into a well (tanka). Drawing attention of the Court towards the statements of the complainant- Karsanram (PW.1) recorded before the competent criminal Court, learned counsel submitted that the complainant- Karsanram (PW.1) and the other material prosecution witnesses viz. Bheekharam (PW.2), Shankarlal (PW.3), Bhanwarlal (PW.4), Gomti (PW.5), Jamna Devi (PW.6) and Mukesh Kumar (PW.7) during their Court statements have not supported the prosecution story and have turned hostile.

4. Learned learned counsel submitted that since the above named material prosecution witnesses during their Court statements have not supported the prosecution story and have turned hostile, the chances of the petitioner getting convicted are very bleak in the present case.

5. Lastly, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody since 23.01.2024 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 has vehemently opposed the bail application and submitted that looking to the nature of accusations levelled against the present petitioner, he does not deserve to be enlarged on bail. However, he was not in a position to refute the fact that the above named material prosecution witnesses during their Court statements have not supported the prosecution story and have turned hostile.

7. Having considered the rival submissions, facts and circumstances of the case and so also the material available in the case file, without expressing any opinion on merits/demerits of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

8. Consequently, the present second bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C . (483 BNSS) is allowed. It is ordered that the accused-petitioner- Prahlad Ram S/o Sh Amba Ram, arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.10/2024, registered at Police Station Bakhasar, District Barmer, 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.