[2025:RJ-JP:50708]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Appeal No.1965/2025 Surendra Singh @ Suru Bana S/o Nandsingh, aged about 27 Years, R/o Biriyakhedi Khurd, Police Station Sadar Jhalawar District Jhalawar.

(At present confined in District Jail Jhalawar.)

----Accused-Appellant/Applicant Versus

1. State of Rajasthan through Public Prosecutor.

----Non-petitioner

2. Victim D/o Nandram, R/o Salotiya, P.S. Sunel, District Jhalawar, Rajasthan.

----Respondent/Victim For Appellant(s) : Mr. Liyakat Khan For Respondent(s) : Ms. Arti Sharma, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND SHARMA

Order

16/12/2025

1. This criminal appeal has been filed by the accused- appellant challenging order dated 15.05.2025 passed by the Court of Special Judge, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocity) Cases, Jhalawar, Rajasthan (for short, 'trial Court') whereby bail application filed by the appellant under Section 439 Cr.P.C., in respect of FIR No.42/2025 registered at Police Station-Sunel, District-Jhalawar for offences under Sections

127(2), 115(2), 65(1), 62 & 109(1) of B.N.S. has been rejected.

2. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that in FIR lodged against him, the prosecutrix does not name anybody, however, the allegations are that the accused made an attempt to rape her. Her statements under Section 183 B.N.S.S. were recorded on 28.02.2025, where all of a sudden, she indicated name of the petitioner, whereas the petitioner was not at all present at the site. She improved her version and instead of levelling allegations of attempt, she stated that she was raped by the petitioner, whereas such statement is not corroborated by the medical evidence. Her Court statements are also contrary to her initial allegations in FIR.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant further submitted that no such incident has taken place in public view, therefore, invoking the provisions of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities Act) is also not tenable. In her Court statements also she has admitted the fact that in her initial Parcha bayan, she has stated that no rape was committed with her. Thus, the version and statement of the prosecutrix are self-contradictory and there is very bleak chances of conviction of the appellant in such circumstances.

Hence, a prayer has been made for granting bail to the appellant.

4. Despite service, no one has put in appearance on behalf of the complainant.

5. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the present appeal.

6. Heard learned counsel for the appellant as well as learned Public Prosecutor and perused the record.

7. Looking to the fact that in FIR specifically it is alleged that the accused did not commit any rape, which was later on improved and subsequent statements, this Court without expressing any opinion on the merits and demerits of the case, deems it just and proper to enlarge the appellant on bail.

8. Accordingly, this appeal is hereby allowed. Order dated 15.05.2025 passed by the learned trial Court is set aside. It is ordered that the accused-appellant Surendra Singh @ Suru Bana S/o Nandsingh shall be released on bail in pursuance of FIR No.42/2025 registered at Police Station-Sunel, District- Jhalawar on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 1,00,000/- along with two sureties of Rs.50,000/- each. That apart, the accused-

appellant shall also follow the conditions as under:-

(i) He shall not tamper with any evidence, nor would influence the witnesses in the case.

(ii) He shall not leave the country without prior permission of the Court.

(iii) He shall co-operate in the trial and shall attend each and every date of hearing in the trial, until and unless his presence is exempted by the trial Court.

(ANAND SHARMA),J DAKSH/384