HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
KULDEEP MATHUR
SURENDRA KUMAR – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF RAJASTHAN – Respondent
CRLMB / 349 / 2026
##PAGE1##
[2026:RJ-JD:5074]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 349/2026
Surendra Kumar S/o Sharwan Kumar, Aged About 24 Years, R/o
Dhirasar Charnan, P.s. Ratanagar, Churu District Churu Raj.
(Presently Lodged In Central Jail Churu)
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor
2. Samundar Ram S/o Mallu Ram Bablu, Aged About 50
Years, R/o Dhirasar Charnan, P.s. Rattangar Churu,
District Churu Raj.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Harsh Shekhawat
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Ramesh Dewasi, PP
Ms. Sonu Manawat, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR
Order
28/01/2026
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.73/2025 registered at Police Station Mahila Thana
(Churu), District Churu, for the offences under Sections 376(2)(n),
and 506 of IPC; Sections 70(1), 87, 75(2) and 351(3) of BNS and
Sections 3/4 of POCSO Act.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public
Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.
Learned counsel submitted that although initially the FIR was
registered against the petitioner for offences under various
provisions of the BNS and the POCSO Act, the learned trial Court,
vide order dated 21.01.2026, has found only the offences under
various Sections of the BNS to be made out against the petitioner.
(Uploaded on 28/01/2026 at 06:17:20 PM)
(Downloaded on 31/01/2026 at 09:53:03 AM)
##PAGE2##[2026:RJ-JD:5074] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-349/2026]
Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that the
petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. It was
contended that the petitioner and the prosecutrix are residents of
the same locality. The petitioner ordinarily resides at Ahmedabad;
however, about six months prior to the lodging of the FIR, when
he returned to his native village, he came in contact with the
prosecutrix. It was submitted that they gradually developed liking
for each other, which culminated in a close friendship.
Learned counsel submitted that on the date of the alleged
incident, the prosecutrix voluntarily went away with him on his
motorcycle. However, they were noticed by Sawarmal and some
other villagers, who followed them, whereafter the prosecutrix
was taken back to her house by her family members. It was
argued that thereafter, possibly due to pressure exerted by family
members or for reasons best known to her, the prosecutrix has
falsely implicated the petitioner in the present criminal case.
Lastly, learned counsel submitted that the petitioner is in
judicial custody; the investigation against him has already been
completed; and the trial of the case is likely to take a considerable
period of time to conclude. On these grounds, it was prayed that
the accused-petitioner be enlarged on bail.
Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed
the bail application.
Having considered the rival submissions, the facts and
circumstances of the case, and upon perusal of the order dated
21.01.2026 passed by the learned trial Court, this Court prima
facie finds that the possibility of the prosecutrix being in a love
(Uploaded on 28/01/2026 at 06:17:20 PM)
(Downloaded on 31/01/2026 at 09:53:03 AM)
##PAGE3##[2026:RJ-JD:5074] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-349/2026]
relationship with the petitioner cannot be ruled out at this stage.
The investigation further reveals that on the date of the incident,
when the prosecutrix was travelling on the motorcycle with the
petitioner, she was seen by her family members, whereafter the
petitioner was allegedly beaten by them. This Court, taking into
consideration the overall circumstances of the case, as also the
fact that the petitioner, aged about 24 years, is in judicial custody
and that the investigation has already been concluded, is inclined
to enlarge the petitioner on bail.
Consequently, the bail application under Section 483 BNSS is
allowed. It is ordered that the accused-petitioner Surendra
Kumar S/o Sharwan Kumar arrested in conne
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.