MANISH RATHORE Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Arrested in furtherance of FIR No.250/2024, registered at Police Station Kotwali, District Pali, petitioner has filed this application under Sec. 483 BNSS (Sec. 439 of old Code) for releasing him on bail. The petitioner is charged for offences punishable under Ss. 384, 327 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) Let me briefly mention the facts germane for disposal of present petition. That complainant Rinki Singh filed a report on 14/5/2024 stating that he owns a spa named "Krishna Therapy". A few months ago, petitioner came to the spa, claimed to be a journalist and demanded Rs.20,000.00 per month from the complainant in order to continue running the spa. The petitioner then started recording a video of the spa and threatened to make the video viral if his demands were not met. The complainant gave him a total of Rs.30,000.00 for two months. However, a few days ago, the petitioner came again and demanded a mobile phone, threatening that if the complainant did not comply, he would not allow the spa to operate. The petitioner further threatened to make the video viral and defame the complainant in the community. The complainant asserts that the petitioner is extorting money from him despite no immoral or illegal activities being conducted at the spa and that he is being blackmailed through undue pressure.

(3.) To begin at the beginning Shri Vineet Kumar Jain, learned Senior Advocate assisted by the learned counsel Mr. Harswardhan Singh Rathore, representing petitioner has fervently argued that after the investigation, a charge-sheet has been filed against the petitioner. He is in custody since 16/5/2024 and the case is triable by Magistrate. The petitioner had previously lodged a complaint against the complainant before the competent authorities, alleging that illegal activities were being conducted under the guise of the spa. Present F.I.R., therefore, appears to have been filed to pressurize the petitioner into settling the matter. It is further argued that the petitioner is innocent person and a false case has been foisted against him; that entire allegations so leveled by the complainant against the petitioner is totally false and baseless. Concluding submissions, he asserted that petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on bail.