Rajasthan High Court Grants Bail Under BNS Citing Counter-FIRs and Trial Delay - 2025-07-10

Legal Articles | Court & Judgment Updates

Rajasthan High Court Grants Bail in BNS Case Citing 'Aata Saata' Engagement Dispute and Counter-FIRs

JODHPUR: The High Court of Rajasthan has granted bail to a man arrested under various sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), noting the existence of counter-FIRs lodged by both parties and the likelihood of a prolonged trial. The case stems from a complex family dispute involving a broken engagement under the “vkVk lkVk” (Aata Saata) tradition.

Justice Mukesh Rajpurohit, presiding over the single-judge bench, allowed the bail application filed by Ramesh Kumar, who was taken into custody on January 8, 2025.

Case Background

The petitioner, Ramesh Kumar, was arrested in connection with F.I.R. No. 08/2025, registered at Police Station Chitalwana, District Sanchore, for offences under Sections 64(1), 74, 87, and 331(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS).

The case involves a convoluted history between the petitioner's and the prosecutrix's families. Both Ramesh Kumar and the prosecutrix were reportedly engaged to be married. This engagement was part of a larger family arrangement known as “vkVk lkVk” (Aata Saata), a reciprocal marriage custom, where the petitioner's niece was also engaged to the prosecutrix's brother.

Arguments of the Petitioner

Counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Ashok Upadhayay, argued that his client was falsely implicated. He submitted that the dispute began after the petitioner's niece, who was engaged to the prosecutrix's brother, was allegedly sexually assaulted, leading to the registration of FIR No. 133/2024 on September 9, 2024.

This incident created a conflict over the continuation of the engagements. The petitioner's counsel contended that Ramesh Kumar was subsequently called by the prosecutrix and her father under the pretext of resolving the matter. Instead, he was allegedly beaten and forced to sign certain documents. Following this, the petitioner lodged his own FIR against them on January 8, 2025.

The defense emphasized that the petitioner has been in custody since January 8, 2025, the investigation is complete with the challan (chargesheet) already filed, and the trial is expected to take a considerable amount of time.

Opposition by the Prosecution

The learned Public Prosecutor, Mr. H.S. Jodha, vehemently opposed the bail application. He argued against granting relief by highlighting that there were two prior criminal cases pending against the petitioner, Ramesh Kumar.

Court's Reasoning and Decision

After considering the rival submissions and the material on record, the High Court decided to grant bail. Justice Rajpurohit did not comment on the merits of the case but based his decision on two key factors:

1. Existence of Counter-FIRs: The court took note of the fact that both parties had lodged FIRs against each other, indicating a pre-existing and complex dispute.
2. Trial Duration: It was acknowledged that the trial would likely be a lengthy process.

In its order, the court stated:

"Having considered the rival submissions, facts and circumstances of the case; considering the records presented before this Court, that counter FIRs has been lodged by the parties in this case and the trial of the case will sufficiently long time, without expressing any opinion on merits/demerits of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail."

Consequently, Ramesh Kumar was ordered to be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 and two sureties of Rs. 25,000 each, subject to his appearance before the trial court on all hearing dates.