The court emphasized that bail should not be granted during ongoing trials for serious offenses like rape, as it may affect witness credibility and trial outcomes.

Order on Board

08.05.2025

1. This is the First Bail Application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 56/2025, registered at Police Station :Fingeshwar, District- Gariyaband, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 331(2), 64(2) and 351(3) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. (For short BNS)

2. Case of the prosecution, in brief is that the complainant/victim lodged a report at Police Station, Fingeshwar, alleging that on the night of 26.02.2025, the applicant unlawfully entered her house and forcefully committed sexual intercourse with her, after which he fled the scene. Based on the said report, offences under Sections 331(2), 64(2), and 351(3) of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 have been registered against the applicant.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that the victim is a married woman and was a consenting party. It was also submitted that though the allegation of rape has been made against the applicant, the victim did not sustain any internal or external injuries. He further stated that there are contradictions in the statements recorded under Sections 180 and 183 of the BNSS. However, upon perusal of the statement recorded under Section 183, it is evident that the victim raised an alarm against the applicant only after her husband returned following the incident. He also submits that the applicant is in jail since 28.02.2025, and the conclusion of the trial shall take quite long time. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail.

4. On the other hand, learned State counsel, opposes the bail application and submits that charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. He would further submit that from the perusal of the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS, there is an allegation against the applicant for commission of rape, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of bail.

5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary.

6. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of X Vs. State of Rajasthan and another in Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 13378 of 2024 decided on 27-11-2024 has observed in the said order that.-

"14. Ordinarily in serious offences like rape, murder, dacoity, etc., once the trial commences and the prosecution starts examining its witnesses, the Court be it the Trial Court or the High Court should be loath in entertaining the bail application of the accused."

15. Over a period of time, we have noticed two things, i.e., (i) either bail is granted after the charge is framed and just before the victim is to be examined by the prosecution before the trial court, or (ii) bail is granted once the recording of the oral evidence of the victim is complete by looking into some discrepancies here or there in the deposition and thereby testing the credibility of the victim.”

16. We are of the view that the aforesaid is not a correct practice that the Courts below should adopt. Once the trial commences, it should be allowed to reach to its final conclusion which may either result in the conviction of the accused or acquittal of the accused. The moment the High Court exercises its discretion in favour of the accused and orders release of the accused on bail by looking into the deposition of the victim, it will have its own impact on the pending trial when it comes to appreciating the oral evidence of the victim. It is only in the event if the trial gets unduly delayed and that too for no fault on the part of the accused, the Court may be justified in ordering his release on bail on the ground that right of the accused to have a speedy trial has been infringed."

7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case, and from the pe