[2025:RJ-JD:54647]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT

JODHPUR

S.B. Criminal Appeal (Sb) No. 2643/2025

Manish Hardasni S/o Shri Dayaldas, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Vd Nagar, Marwar Junction, Police Station - Marwar Junction,

District Pali, Rajasthan. (At Present Lodged In District Jail Pali)

----Appellant

Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

2. Gunjan W/o A. Hardasni, Aged About 32 Years, R/o

Marwar Junction Police Station, District Pali, Rajasthan.

----Respondents

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Naman Mohnot

For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sri Ram Choudhary, PP

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR

Order

17/12/2025

The instant appeal has been filed under Section 14A SC/ST

(Prevention of Atrocities) Act on behalf of the appellant, who is in custody in connection with F.I.R. No.157/2025 registered at Police Station Marwar Junction, District Pali, for the offences under Sections 64(2)(f)(m), 76, 351(3), 332(2) of BNS and Sections 3(1)(w)(ii) and 3(2)(v)(va) of the SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act against the order dated 17.10.2025 passed by the learned Special Judge Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act Cases, Pali whereby, the bail application preferred under Section 439

Cr.P.C. on behalf of the appellant was rejected.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material

available on record.

prosecutrix, who is a mature married woman, has falsely implicated the appellant in the present criminal case. Drawing the attention of

the Court towards the FIR and the challan papers, learned counsel submitted that, as per the prosecutrix, the appellant, who is a close relative of her husband, was a regular visitor to their house. It was alleged that about two months prior to the lodging of the FIR, the appellant made the prosecutrix consume a cold drink containing an intoxicating substance and, after she fell unconscious, subjected her to forcible sexual assault. It was further alleged that the appellant captured obscene videos and photographs of the prosecutrix and thereafter, by threatening to circulate the same, subjected her to sexual assault on multiple occasions.

Learned counsel further submitted that the facts and circumstances of the case clearly indicate that it is a case of the prosecutrix having entered into a consensual physical relationship with the appellant. However, when their relationship came to the notice of her husband, the prosecutrix falsely implicated the appellant in the present case. It was contended that no obscene videos or photographs of the prosecutrix have been recovered by the investigating agency and that the appellant has not even been charge-sheeted for offences under the Information Technology Act. On the contrary, the call detail records between the appellant and the prosecutrix, as annexed with the case file, are sufficient to establish that the prosecutrix was in constant touch with the appellant and, despite having ample opportunities, did not disclose the alleged forcible sexual assault to anyone.

judicial custody and that the trial of the case is likely to take a sufficiently long time to conclude; therefore, the benefit of bail ought to be granted to the accused-appellant.

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.

Having regard to the entirety of the facts and circumstances available on record, upon consideration of the arguments advanced at the Bar, and keeping in view that the prosecutrix is a mature married woman who lodged the FIR after a delay of more than three months; that no obscene videos or photographs allegedly captured by the appellant for blackmailing purposes have been recovered by the investigating agency; and that the appellant has not been charge-sheeted for offences under the Information Technology Act, this Court is of the prima facie opinion that the order rejecting the bail application filed on behalf of the appellant cannot be sustained and deserves to be set aside.

Consequently, the instant appeal is allowed. The impugned orde