[2026:RJ-JD:2905]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 15066/2025 Raju S/o Amra, Aged About 30 Years, Khedapada Miyasa Police Station Bhungada District Banswara (Presently Lodged At District Jail Banswara)

----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Devendra Sanwalot For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mr. Lalit Kishore Sen, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR

Order

16/01/2026

1. This application for bail under Section 483 of BNSS has been filed by the petitioner who has been arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.102/2025 registered at Police Station Bhungra, District Banswara, for offences under Sections 329(3), 65(1) and 64(1)of the BNS.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the prosecutrix, who is a married major woman, owing to an old land dispute between the parties has roped the petitioner in a false criminal case. Learned counsel submitted that as per prosecutrix, on 27.09.2025 when she went to her field for taking fodder, she was subjected to forcible sexual assault by the petitioner. Learned counsel submitted that the FIR has been lodged after delay of more than seven days without any plausible explanation. He submitted that during the course of medical examination of the prosecutrix, no internal or external injuries were found on her body parts.

3. Lastly, learned counsel submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody since 05.10.2025; the investigation against the petitioner has already been completed and the trial of the case is likely to consume a sufficiently long time. On these grounds, he implored the Court to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

4. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application and submitted that the prosecutrix, in her statements recorded under Sections 180 and 183 of BNSS, has levelled specific allegations of her being subjected to forcible sexual assault by the petitioner and therefore, looking to the seriousness of allegations against the petitioner, he does not deserve to be enlarged on bail. However, he was not in a position to refute the fact that during the course of medical examination of the prosecutrix, no external or internal injuries were found on her body parts. Learned Public Prosecutor has not shown any apprehension of the petitioner influencing the material prosecution witnesses of the case or fleeing away from justice in case he is enlarged on bail by this Court.

5. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.

6. Having considered the rival submissions, facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merits/demerits of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

7. Consequently, the bail application under Section 483 of BNSS is allowed. It is ordered that the accused-petitioner Raju S/o Amra arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.102/2025 registered at Police Station Bhungra, District Banswara, 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.

8. It is however, made clear that findings recorded/observations made above are for limited purposes of adjudication of bail application. The trial court shall not get prejudiced by the same.

(KULDEEP MATHUR),J

82-Dinesh/-