[2026:RJ-JD:8266]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 444/2026 Mangu S/o Kadwa, Aged About 35 Years, Lohariya Bada, Police Thana Kushalgarh, District Banswara Raj. (Lodged In Sub Jail Kushalgarh)

----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Atul Maheshwari For Respondent(s) : Mr. Hanuman Prajapati, PP Mr. OP Choudhary, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL BENIWAL

Order

13/02/2026

1. This application for bail has been filed by the petitioner under Section 483 of BNSS (old Section 439 of Cr.P.C.) in connection with FIR No. 266/2025 dated 04.08.2025, Police Station Kushalgarh, Banswara, for the offences under Sections 74, 331(3), 64(1) and 351(3) of the BNS, 2023.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case and false allegations have been levelled against him. The FIR was lodged on 04.08.2025 for the alleged incident which occurred on 26.07.2025. While referring to the FIR, he submits that there is not only delay in filing the FIR for incident which occurred on 26.07.2025 but also it is stated therein that prior to 3 months of lodging of the FIR, petitioner committed sexual assault upon the victim. This clearly indicates that story as narrated by the prosecutrix is highly doubtful. Statements of the prosecutrix recorded under Sections 180 and 183 of the BNSS, also indicate that petitioner and the prosecutrix were known to each other and had amicable relations in the past. Though, allegation of sexual assault has been alleged in the statement under Section 180 of BNSS, however, in the totality of the circumstances, it reflects that there were possibility of consensual relation between the petitioner and the prosecutrix. While referring to statement of the prosecutrix recorded under Section 183 of BNS, he submits that she has changed her stand and has introduced two persons who were accompanying her on the date of incident i.e. on 26.07.2025. The story as narrated by the prosecutrix becomes more doubtful, more so when she herself submits that the incident of sexual assault alleged to have occurred three months back, was conveyed to her husband, however, despite that, the FIR has been lodged after such an inordinate delay. The petitioner is in judicial custody since 29.11.2025 and the trial will take sufficiently long time, therefore, he deserves to be enlarged on bail.

3. Learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposes this bail application.

4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor and perused the material available on record.

5. Having considered the rival submissions, facts and circumstances of this case and after perusing the challan papers so also considering the statements of the prosecutrix recorded under Sections 180 and 183 of BNSS, so also considering the delay in lodging of the FIR with regard to the incident which occurred on 26.07.2025 and the alleged sexual assault which is also about three months prior to the date of lodging of the FIR, in the considered opinion of this Court, no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner behind the bars for an indefinite period as the trial will take sufficiently long time. Thus, without expressing any opinion on merits/demerits of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the bail application filed by the petitioner deserves to be accepted.

6. Accordingly, the bail application filed under Section 483 of BNSS is allowed. It is ordered that petitioner- Mangu S/o Kadwa, shall be released on bail in connection with the aforesaid FIR; provided he executes personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sound and solvent sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of learned trial Court for his appearance before that court on each and every date of hearing and whenever called upon to do so till the completion of the trial.

7. It is however, made clear that findings recorded/observat