[2025:RJ-JP:34892] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 10110/2025 Chandra Prakash @ Golu S/o Shri Panchu Ram, Aged About 21 Years, R/o Near Govt. School, Prem Nagar Third, P.s Udhyog Nagar, Kota (Raj.) (Accused At Present Confined In Central Jail Kota). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Samarth Sharma For Respondent(s) For Complainant(s) : : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP with Mr. Gaurav Gupta, Asstt. G.A. Mr. Prakash Kumar Jha HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 01/09/2025 1. The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.258/2025 registered at Police Station Mahaveer Nagar, District Kota City (Rajasthan) for the offences punishable under Sections 69, 126(2), 115(2), 333 and 189(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, (in short ‘BNS’) 2023. After completion of investigation, police filed charge-sheet in this matter for the offence punishable under Section 69 of BNS, 2023. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel submits that on earlier occasion, FIR No.173/2025 was lodged against the petitioner by the victim at Police Station Anantpura, District Kota [2025:RJ-JP:34892] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-10110/2025] City, alleging therein that petitioner gave beatings to her and her mother. Counsel submits that on the very next day, impugned FIR came to be registered against the petitioner alleging therein that petitioner sexually exploited the victim on the pretext of marriage. Counsel submits that said allegations are baseless as victim herself is a married lady. It is contended that trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. Counsel submits that petitioner is in custody since 19.07.2025 and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor assisted by learned counsel for the complainant vehemently opposes the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner. Counsel for the complainant submits that there is reference in the FIR itself that victim submitted a complaint on 20.06.2025 however, no action was taken by the police on the said complaint. 4. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that existence of the said complaint (report) is questionable as victim failed to provide copy of the said report. He further submits that even today, counsel for the complainant does not have the said report. 5. I have considered the contentions. 6. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, especially considering the material available on record in the form of charge-sheet, as also considering the fact that matter has been reported to the police after a delay of more than nine months and trial will take [2025:RJ-JP:34892] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-10110/2025] considerable time in its conclusion as well as looking to the period of custody, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it fit and proper to allow this bail application. 7. 7. This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner Chandra Prakash @ Golu S/o Shri Panchu Ram shall be released on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court with the stipulation that he shall appear before that Court and any court to which the matter is transferred, on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so. 8. The observations made hereinabove are only for decision of the instant bail application and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J LALIT MOHAN /133