HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR, J
ALTAF – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF RAJASTHAN – Respondent
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.02/2025 registered at Police Station Nohar, District Hanumangarh for the offences under Sections 78(2) of BNS and Section 11/12 of POCSO Act.
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 allegation against the present petitioner is that he was causing harassment to the victim ‘M’ who is a minor girl since last six months. The specific allegation against the present petitioner is that he used to stalk her on her way to school and intervene by asking her to becomr his friend. The further allegation against the present petitioner is that on 18.12.2024, he forcibly stopped victim ‘M’ and held her hand and asked for her mobile number.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. The FIR has been lodged on 27.12.2024 i.e. after a delay of 13 days from the date of alleged incident without disclosing any plausible explanation for the same;
Bail granted due to completed investigation, absence of prior criminal record, and no risk of influencing witnesses.
The court granted bail based on the non-life-threatening nature of the injuries and the completion of the investigation, emphasizing the importance of trial duration in bail considerations.
Bail may be granted when the accused has not played an active role in the alleged crime and the trial is expected to be lengthy.
Delay in lodging FIR without plausible explanation undermines prosecution's credibility, justifying bail.
The court found prima facie merit in the claim of a mutual relationship between the petitioner and the victim, allowing bail due to completed investigation and time served in custody.
Bail granted due to lack of evidence from material witnesses and absence of criminal antecedents, emphasizing judicial discretion in bail applications.
Bail may be granted when investigation is complete and no risk of influencing witnesses exists, emphasizing case-specific evaluation.
Bail can be granted when investigation is complete and co-accused have received bail, despite serious allegations.
The court emphasized that prior acquaintance and lack of evidence of coercion justified granting bail, highlighting the importance of assessing risks of influencing witnesses.
The absence of direct evidence of mens rea precludes liability for abetment of suicide, justifying bail for the accused.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.