Bagda Ram vs State Of Rajasthan

@JUDGEMENT- JUDGEMENT

Kuldeep Mathur, J

This application for bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner who has been arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.376/2023 registered at Police Station Bhinmal, District Jalore, for offences under Sections 342, 365, 384, 376 of the IPC.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned counsel submitted that as per prosecution on 16.08.2023 the prosecutrix was kidnapped by the present petitioner and thereafter she was repeatedly being subjected to sexual assault/rape by the petitioner.

Drawing attention of the court towards the FIR learned counsel submitted that the prosecutrix who is a mature married woman aged about 35 years, was having a consensual relationship with the present petitioner. The FIR has been lodged after a delay of about two months from the date on which the alleged incident of kidnapping took place. It was contended that the prosecutrix remained in the company of the present petitioner at Rajkot (Gujarat) out of her own free will and volition.

Learned counsel submitted that on the relations between the parties turning strained, the petitioner has been roped in the false case. Learned counsel submitted the petitioner is in judicial custody and trial of the case will sufficiently long time, therefore the benefit of bail should be granted to the accused-petitioner..

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.

Having considered the rival submissions, facts and circumstances of the case, this court prima facie finds that no plausible explanation has been furnished by the prosecutrix for lodging the FIR after a delay of about two months from the date of alleged incident. This court also prima facie finds that the prosecutrix is a mature married women and despite having ample opportunities did not inform the fact of she being kidnapped on subjected to sexual assault/rape by the present petitioner to anybody while prosecutrix was at Rajkot (Gujarat) with the present petitioner. Therefore, the argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner and prosecutrix were having a consensual relationship and the prosecutrix voluntarily eloped with the present petitioner cannot brushed aside at this stage. This Court also prima facie finds that the prosecution has not shown any apprehension of prosecutrix being influenced by the present petitioner in case he is enlarged on bail. Thus, without expressing any opinion on the merits/demerits of the case, this court is inclined to enlarge the present petitioner on bail.

Accordingly, the bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the accused – petitioner Bagda Ram S/o Kana Ram, shall be enlarged on bail in connection with F.I.R. No.376/2023 registered at Police Station Bhinmal, District Jalore, 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 as and when called upon to do so.