MUNESH CHOUDHARY Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has been arrested in connection with FIR No.34/2022 of Police Station Shivpura, District Pali for the offence punishable under Ss. 450, 376(2)(N), 506 IPC and Sec. 67 of IT Act. He has preferred this third bail application under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C. The second bail application was dismissed by this Court vide order dtd. 13/9/2022.

(2.) Counsel for the petitioner submits that the compromise has already been arrived at between the parties. The accused-petitioner is inside the jail since 6/3/2022 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. Counsel for the complainant concurs the fact of compromise, however, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the third bail application.

(3.) Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the fact that compromise has been arrived at between the parties, 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.