Order

1. The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 BNSS on behalf of accused-petitioner. The petitioner has been arrested in connection with FIR No.308/2025 registered at Police Station Kotget, District Bikaner for the offence(s) under Sections64(2)(m), 308(2), 351(2) of BNS, 2023.

2. Learned counsel for the accused-petitioner submits that the accused-petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case for the offence punishable under Sections 64(2)(m), 308(2), 351(2) of BNS, 2023. It is further contended that petitioner and prosecutrix were in a consensual relationship and residing together. It is argued that the FIR itself is delayed by almost 7 months and it is alleged in the FIR that petitioner was regularly blackmailing the prosecutrix, however, the Police after investigation did not find commission of offence under Information Technology Act and no obscene photographs of prosecutrix were recovered. The prosecutrix herself is a married lady having 3 children. It is also contended that the allegation that petitioner demanded money and prosecutrix transferred money in the account of petitioner several times, is also an afterthought. The charge-sheet has already been submitted, the petitioner is behind the bars since 18.12.2025 and further trial may take considerable time, there are no criminal antecedents against the petitioner, therefore, the bail application of the petitioner may kindly be allowed.

3. Learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the complainant have vehemently opposed the bail application and contended that mere delay in filing the FIR itself is not a ground to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The petitioner was continuously blackmailing the prosecutrix on the pretext of circulating her obscene photographs and demanded money. The prosecutrix has paid the amount several times to the petitioner and the same has come in record during investigation. The agreement of live-in relationship is also false, therefore, the bail application of the petitioner deserves dismissal.

4. Heard and perused the material available on record.

5. Considering the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner and more particularly that FIR itself is delayed by almost 7 months and no obscene photographs were recovered from petitioner's mobile, therefore, without commenting further on the merits of the case, I deem it just and proper to enlarge the accused-petitioner on bail.

6. Accordingly, the bail application under Section 483 BNSS is allowed and it is ordered that the accused-petitioner Lalit Rana S/o Bhairuram, in connection with FIR No.308/2025 registered at Police Station Kotget, District Bikaner shall be enlarged on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for his appearance before the court concerned on all the dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.