[2026:RJ-JD:8960]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 1167/2026 Bhagwanlal S/o Bheru Lal, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Roodri, Police Thana Kapasan, District Chittorgarh.(Presently Lodged In Sub Jail, Kapasan)

----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Zafar Khan Mr. Bhagirath Solanki For Respondent(s) : Mr. Hanuman Singh, PP with Mr. O.P. Choudhary HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL BENIWAL

Order

18/02/2026

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. 212/2025 dated 07.07.2025, Police Station Kapasan, District Chittorgarh, for the offences under Sections 64(1), 74 & 115(2) of BNS, 2023. After investigation, offence under Section

332(b) of the BNS, 2023 was added.

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 present FIR is a counter blast of the earlier FIR No.172/2025 which was lodged by the petitioner on 03.06.2025 against the prosecutrix and her husband. He submits that the allegation of rape has been alleged against the present petitioner by the complainant who is aged about 28 years and is a married woman. The petitioner was brutally beaten by the husband of the prosecutrix on 02.06.2025 which is fortified from the statement of Pappu Lal who was present at the time of incident. In connection with said incident, the husband of the prosecutrix was arrested upon FIR No.172/2025 been lodged by the petitioner and was chage-sheeted.

2.1. In the present FIR it is alleged that the incident occurred somewhere in mid of March, 2025 and it has been lodged after a delay of almost four months. The allegations levelled in FIR become highly doubtful as it is stated by the prosecutrix in her statement made under Section 180 of BNSS that at the time when alleged incident occurred, her bother-in-law immediately came and the incident was narrated to him as well as other family members. The husband of the prosecutrix also returned soon after the alleged incident however, there is reason for not lodging the FIR for three months thereafter. The petitioner is in judicial custody since 16.08.2025 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 and submits that prosecutrix in her statement recorded under Section 180 of BNSS so also under Section 183 of BNSS categorically made the allegation of committing rape by the petitioner and therefore, he may not be enlarged on bail.

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 charge-sheet so also considering the delay in lodging of FIR; the earlier FIR lodged on 03.06.2025 wherein on the allegation levelled by the petitioner upon husband of the prosecutrix he has been charge-sheeted; one eye witness Pappu Lal has also seen the incident when the petitioner was beaten which prima facie indicates that FIR in question was lodged as a counter blast, 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- Bhagwanlal S/o Bheru Lal, 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/- ea