Krishna Kumar vs State Of Rajasthan

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.20/2024 registered at Police Station Rajaldesar, Dist. Churu, for the offences under Sections 376(2)(n), 366, 506 and 417 of IPC.

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

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the prosecutrix and the petitioner both aged about 24 years were having a consensual relationship. However, upon relations between them turning strained, the present petitioner has been falsely implicated in a criminal case. Learned counsel submitted that as a matter of fact, the prosecutrix eloped with the present petitioner on 09.12.2023 and remained in his company out of her own free will and volition.

Learned counsel submitted that while the prosecutrix was in the company of the petitioner, she solemnized the marriage with him at Arya Samaj Mandir, Merti Gate, Jodhpur. Thereafter, she stayed with him in a hotel namely Lord Shiva hotel. It was submitted that these facts are sufficient to establish that the prosecutrix, despite having ample opportunities, did not disclose the factum of she being abducted or subjected to forcible sexual assault-rape by the present petitioner.

Learned counsel further submitted that the prosecutrix has given statements against the petitioner under various Sections of Cr.P.C. under the pressure of her family members and that no obscene photos or videos of the prosecutrix allegedly captured by the petitioner have been recovered by the Investigating Agency.

Lastly, learned counsel submitted that the petitioner has not even been charge-sheeted for the offences under IT Act, 2000; the petitioner is in judicial custody and the trial of the case will take sufficiently long time, therefore, the benefit of bail may be granted to the accused-petitioner.

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application and submitted that looking to seriousness of the allegations levelled against the present petitioner, he does not deserve to be enlarged on bail.

Having considered the rival submissions, facts and circumstances of the case and after perusing the challan papers, this Court prima facie finds sufficient force in the argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the prosecutrix voluntarily went away with the present petitioner and remained in his company out of her own free will and volition, and thus it cannot be brushed aside at this stage particularly keeping in view the fact that while she was in the company of the petitioner, she did not disclose the factum of she being abducted or being subjected to forcible sexual assault-rape by the present petitioner. This Court also prima facie finds that the prosecution has not shown any apprehension of the petitioner influencing the prosecutrix or fleeing away from justice, in case he is enlarged on bail. Thus, without expressing any opinion on merits/demerits of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

Consequently, the bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed. It is ordered that the accused-petitioner Krishna Kumar S/o Dana Ram arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.20/2024 registered at Police Station Rajaldesar, Dist. Churu, shall be released on bail, if not wanted in any other case, provided he furnishes a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- and two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each, to the satisfaction of learned trial court, for his appearance before that court on each & every date of hearing and whenever called upon to do so till completion of the trial.