[2025:RJ-JP:42401] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Second Bail Application No.13612/2025 Rahul Alias Golu S/o Shri Sitaram Saini, Aged About 20 Years, R/o Chidiyo Ki Badi, Ward No. 2, Tonk Police Thana Sadar, Tonk, Rajasthan (Presenlty Confined In Central Jail, Tonk) ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through PP Tonk 2. Victim, R/o 3. Rajulal Saini S/o Roopchand Saini, R/o Chidiyo Ki Badi, Ward No. 2, Tonk Police Thana Sadar, Tonk, Rajasthan. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Vandana Sharma For Respondent(s) For Complainant(s) : : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP with Mr. Tapesh Agarwal, PP Mr. Vikas Saini HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 16/10/2025 1. This second bail application under Section 483 of BNSS has been filed on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.335/2024 registered at Police Station Sadar Tonk, District Tonk (Rajasthan) for the offences punishable under Sections 70(2), 127(2) & 137(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, (in short ‘BNS’) 2023 and Section 5g/6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. After completion of investigation police filed charge-sheet in this matter for the offences punishable under Sections 127(2), 137(3), 64(2)(m), [2025:RJ-JP:42401] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-13612/2025] 64(2)(f) & 65(1) BNS, 2023 and Sections 3/4(2) & 5(l)(n)/6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. 2. The first bail application filed on behalf of the petitioner was dismissed as withdrawn by this Court vide order dated 04.09.2025 while giving liberty to renew the prayer for bail after recording testimony of victim. Now, victim has been examined during the course of trial thus, this second bail application has been preferred. 3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. She submits that from the court testimony of the victim, it is apparent that present FIR has been lodged with false and frivolous allegations. The victim in her court testimony clearly stated that the accused petitioner did not commit anything wrong with her and that present FIR has been lodged under pressure and force of her maternal uncle. She also deposed that her maternal uncle did not like her talking with the accused petitioner and on the date of alleged incident, he saw them talking with each other and therefore, gave beatings to them. She also contends that there is no medical corroboration of the allegations levelled against the petitioner. He is in custody since 25.12.2024. Trial will take considerable time in its conclusion and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor assisted by learned counsel for the complainant vehemently opposes the prayer of bail made by learned counsel for the petitioner. 5. I have considered the contentions. [2025:RJ-JP:42401] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-13612/2025] 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 looking to the court testimony of the victim wherein she stated that the petitioner did not commit anything wrong with her and the fact the petitioner is in custody since 25.12.2024 and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it fit and proper to allow the second bail application. 7. This second bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner Rahul Alias Golu S/o Shri Sitaram Saini 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 bail application and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J LALIT MOHAN /51