[2025:RJ-JP:1576] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 15834/2024 Tejram S/o Ramkaran, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Kedar Wali Dhani, Tan Garh, Police Station Sikandra, District Dausa Rajasthan. (At Present Confined In District Jail Dausa). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Anil Sharma For Respondent(s) : Ms. Arti Sharma, PP Ms. Sharda Bai Gurjar HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 10/01/2025 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.254/2024 registered at Police Station Mahila Thana (Dausa), District Dausa (Raj.) for the offences punishable under Sections 64(1), 351(2), 333 of BNS & Sections 66 & 67 of IT Act. Later on, police filed the charge-sheet for the offences punishable under Sections 351(2), 64(2)(m) & 332(b) of IPC. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Learned counsel submits that the FIR has been lodged against the petitioner after a great delay of two years for which no proper explanation is available on record. He submits that although there is allegation against the petitioner that he prepared the obscene [2025:RJ-JP:1576] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-15834/2024] photographs/videos of the victim but after investigation, no such video/photographs have been recovered by the Investigating Agency. It is submitted that as per charge-sheet, victim made 39 calls to the petitioner from January 2024 to May 2024 which is evident from the call records. Counsel submits that earlier, petitioner lodged FIR against the unknown person for committing robbery with him wherein husband of victim was found involved & he was arrested. Now only to harass the petitioner, the impugned FIR has been lodged. Petitioner is in custody since 22.11.2024. Charge-sheet has been filed & trial of the case will take considerable time. Further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor assisted by learned counsel for complainant vehemently opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner. They submit that there is specific allegation against the petitioner that he continuously sexually exploited the victim for the last two years. 4. I have considered the contentions. 5. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by both the parties, especially the fact that during the course of investigation, no obscene photos/videos has been recovered by the Investigating Agency & also considering the delay in reporting the matter to the police; charge-sheet has been filed as well as looking to the custody period, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it proper to allow the bail application. The observations made hereinabove is only for [2025:RJ-JP:1576] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-15834/2024] decision of the instant bail application and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner. 6. This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner - Tejram S/o Ramkaran, 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. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J GAUTAM JAIN /238