RATAN NATH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant appeal has been filed under Sec. 14A SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act on behalf of the appellant, who is in custody in connection with FIR No.154/2023, Police Station Pratap Nagar, District Bhilwara, for the offences under Ss. 363, 366, 376(2)(N) of the and Ss. 3(i)(w), 3(2)(v) of the SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act against the order dtd. 5/1/2024 passed by the learned Special Judge Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act Cases, Bhilwara whereby, the bail application preferred under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C. on behalf of the appellant was rejected. Heard learned counsel for the parties at Bar and perused the material available on record.

(2.) Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant is aged about 21 years has been falsely implicated in the present criminal case by the prosecutrix, who is aged about 20 years. Learned counsel submitted that as a matter of fact that the appellant and prosecutrix were having consensual relationship, however on relationships between them turning strained, the prosecutrix has implicated the appellant in a false criminal case. Learned counsel submitted that the prosecutrix had travelled with the appellant to various places and remained in the company of the present appellant out of her own free will and volition. Learned counsel submitted that despite having ample opportunities, the prosecutrix, who is a mature and major woman, did not disclose the factum of she being repeatedly subjected to sexual assault to anyone. The accused-appellant is in judicial custody and the trial of the case will take submitted long time to be concluded. Counsel further submits that the learned court below has grossly erred in law and facts in declining release the appellant on bail. Therefore, it is prayed that the benefit of bail should be granted to the accused-appellant.

(3.) Learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the complainant have opposed the prayer for bail. Having regard to the entirety of facts and circumstances as available on record and upon a consideration of the arguments advanced at bar, this Court is of the prima facie opinion that the appellant and prosecutrix traveled with appellant at various places and remained in the company of the appellant out of her free will and volition. This Court also prima facie finds that the prosecutrix, who is a mature and major woman despite having ample opportunities, did not disclose the factum of she being repeatedly subjected to sexual assault, to anyone. This Court is of the opinion that order rejecting the application for bail filed on behalf of the appellant, cannot be sustained and deserves to be set aside.