[2025:RJ-JP:35677]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 10248/2025 Pukhraj son of Babulal, Aged About 31 Years, Resident Of Raigar Basti, Sanwarda, Police Station Mokhampura, District Jaipur (Raj.) ( At Present In District Jail Tonk)

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p.

2. Victim, R/o ----Respondents Connected With S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 10249/2025 Ravi son of Pappulal, Aged About 24 Years, Resident Of Raigar Basti, Sanwarda, Police Station Mokhampura, District Jaipur (Raj.) ( At Present In District Jail Tonk)

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p.

2. Victim, R/o ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ramakant Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vijay Singh Yadav, PP Mr. Aveesh Mourya for complainant HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN

Order

04/09/2025

1. Instant applications for bail are filed under Section 483 of BNSS by the petitioners-accused Pukhraj son of Babulal and Ravi son of Pappulal in FIR No.61/2025 dated 30.03.2025 registered at P.S. Malpura District - Tonk, whereby the petitioners-accused have charged under Section 137 (2) of BNS, 2023.

2. The petitioners were arrested and are in judicial custody since their arrest. The Court below has dismissed the bail application.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners relying upon grounds raised in bail applications submits that the petitioners are innocent and falsely implicated in the present case. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the complainant father of victim has lodged a missing person report for elopement of his daughter from 29.03.2025 and same is registered under Section 137(2) of BNS. He further submits that afterwards the victim was recovered from Bengaluru and her statements under Sections 180 and 183 of BNS were recorded. He submits that victim having an affair and consensual relation with Pukhraj and only at her instigation, Pukhraj has traveled with victim to Bengaluru. He further referred date of birth claimed by prosecution and submitted that the victim is more than 16 years old and her date of birth is 06.07.2008. He further submits that victim has specifically mentioned that she has no objection in case bail is granted to the petitioners accused. He further submits that there is no allegation of rape against Ravi as he has been arrayed as an accused only on ground of assistance to accused Pukhraj. At last, he submits that investigation is complete and charge-sheet has been filed. He also submitted that the trial will take its own time and no purpose will be served by keeping the petitioners-accused in custody.

4. Aforesaid contentions were opposed by learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the complainant.

5. Learned counsel for the complainant has submits that accused Pukhraj is a married man and having a son and victim is a minor who was pressurized and enticed by petitioner accused for elopement. He further submits that parents of victim have opposed the bail applications and since the victim is a minor, therefore, her consent is immaterial.

6. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners-accused and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material placed on record by both the parties.

7. On basis of report lodged by father of victim dated

30.03.2025 about elopement of victim on 29.03.2025, a case is registered under Section 137(2) of BNS and during investigation, victim was recovered after more than one month. The statements of victim were recorded under Sections 180 and 183 of BNSS. The date of birth of victim is 06.07.2008 and charge-sheet has been filed. The age of victim is between 16 to 18 years. The impugned order dated 30.07.2025 reflect that victim was present before the trial Court on 14.07.2025 from Nari Niketan, Ajmer. The victim has made a statement that the accused be released on bail and same is recorded by the trial Court.

8. Upon hearing the arguments and perusing the record, we have found that the peti