SUNIL Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) the petitioner has been arrested in connection with FIR No. 89/2022 of Police Station Phalodi, District Jodhpur, for the offence punishable under Ss. 354A, 354D, 341, 506, 120B, 201 of IPC and Sec. 7/8, 9(G)/10, 11/12 of POCSO Act. He has preferred this bail application under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the similarly situated co-accused Sushil and Bachna Ram both have been granted bail by the trial Court and the case of the present petitioner is similar to the co-accused. The accused-petitioner is in judicial custody and the trial of the case will take sufficient long time to be concluded. Therefore, the benefit of bail should be granted to the accused-petitioner.

(3.) Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I deem it just and proper to grant bail to the accused petitioner under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C.