[2026:RJ-JP:2242] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 12110/2025 Suraj Kumar S/o Yogendra Singh, Aged About 23 Years, R/o Sogar Police Station Kumher District Deeg. At Present In District Jail, Deeg. ----Petitioner Versus State of Rajasthan, through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Harendra Singh For Respondent(s) : Mr. A.K. Gupta, PP Mr. Kapil, for complainant HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA Order 19/01/2026 1. This bail application has been filed by the accused petitioners u/S 483 BNSS in connection with FIR No. 414/2025 registered at Police Station Kumher, District Deeg for offences u/S 108, 351(3), 61(2) & 64(1) of BNS. 2. Heard and considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the accused petitioner as well as learned Public Prosecutor and perused the challan papers. 3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the accused petitioner that the accused petitioner has been implicated in a case based on false and fabricated facts. It is submitted that the accused petitioner and the prosecutrix were having consensual relationship and when their relationship came in the notice of the parents of the prosecutrix, the prosecutrix felt uneasy and committed suicide. The accused petitioner is said to be in custody [2026:RJ-JP:2242] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-12110/2025] since 28.06.2025 and after completion of investigation, the police has submitted charge-sheet in the matter. 4. It is also submitted by the learned counsel for the accused petitioner that as alleged by the complainant party that the accused petitioner has forwarded certain obscene video clips to the cellphone of the father of the prosecutrix, no video clip was recovered as per the charge-sheet. As per the submissions of learned counsel for the accused petitioner, the complainant party had filed an application to the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kumher, District Deeg for including such video clips as a part of charge-sheet, but the Court concerned, after considering the overall facts, has dismissed the application filed by the complainant party. 5. Learned Public Prosecutor as well as learned counsel for the complainant vehemently opposed the bail application. Learned counsel for the complainant submits that the accused petitioner forwarded certain obscene video of the accused petitioner with the prosecutrix to the cellphone of the father of the deceased prosecutrix due to which the prosecutrix had committed suicide. 6. On perusal of the contents of the FIR so also the material collected during the investigation and taking into consideration the submissions made by counsel for the accused petitioner, probability of false and fabricated allegation cannot be ruled out. Hence, this Court, without expressing any opinion on merits or demerits of this case, deems just and proper to enlarge the petitioner on bail. 7. Accordingly, this bail application is allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner shall be released on bail provided that he [2026:RJ-JP:2242] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-12110/2025] furnishes personal bonds in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lac Only) each, together with two sureties in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only)(each) to the satisfaction of the Trial Court with the stipulation that he shall appear before that Court or any Court to which the matter is transferred, on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so. (GANESH RAM MEENA),J Gaurav Srivastava /53