PAWAN KUMAR Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application for bail under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.438/2022 registered at Police Station Pratapnagar, District Bhilwara for offences under Sec. 376(2)(n) of the IPC and Sec. 67A of the Information Technology Act. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned counsel submitted that as per prosecution, in the month of November 2020, the petitioner had mixed some intoxicant in the drink of the prosecutrix and upon drinking the same, she fell unconscious. It is further alleged that the prosecutrix was subjected to sexual assault-rape by the present petitioner and her obscene photographs were snapped by him. Thereafter, the petitioner threatened the prosecutrix to circulate her obscene photographs on the social media platforms and thereby sexually assaulted her on multiple occasions. Learned counsel submitted that FIR has been lodged after a delay of about 2 years from the date on which the prosecutrix was allegedly subjected to sexual assault by the present petitioner for the first time. Learned counsel further contended that as a matter of fact, the petitioner and the prosecutrix were in consensual physical relationship, however on relations between them turning strained, the petitioner has been roped in a false criminal case. To substantiate this contention, attention of the Court was drawn towards various photographs and Whatsapp chats exchanged between the petitioner and the prosecutrix. Learned counsel submitted that the material available on record is sufficient to conclude that the prosecutrix remained in relationship with the petitioner for about 3 years out of her own free will and volition.

(2.) Lastly, learned counsel submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody, challan has been filed before the competent criminal court and the trial of the case will take sufficiently long time, therefore, the benefit of bail should be granted to the accused-petitioner. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.

(3.) Having considered the rival submissions, facts and circumstances of the case, statements of the prosecutrix recorded under Sec. 164 Cr.P.C. and the documents annexed with the present bail application preferred on behalf of the petitioner, this Court prima facie finds that the argument of learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner and the prosecutrix were in consensual physical relationship from last 3 years cannot be brushed aside at this stage. This Court also prima facie finds that no plausible explanation has been furnished by the prosecutrix for filing the FIR against the present petitioner after a delay of about 2 years from the date when she was allegedly subjected to sexual assault-rape by the present petitioner for the first time. Thus, without expressing any opinion on merits/demerits of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the bail application under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the accused-petitioner- Pawan Kumar S/o Shiv Kumar Patwa shall be enlarged on bail in connection with FIR No.438/2022 registered at Police Station Pratapnagar, District Bhilwara, provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000.00 with two sureties of Rs.25,000.00each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for his appearance before the court concerned on all the dates of hearing as and when called upon to so.