KRISHAN 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 F.I.R. No.28/2024, registered at Police Station Binjrad (As per impugned order) and Dhorimana (As per FIR), District Barmer, for the offences punishable under Ss. 450, 376 and 384 of IPC. Heard learned counsel for the parties at Bar. Perused the material available on record. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. Drawing attention of the FIR, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the prosecutrix is a major woman aged about 22 years. Learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner has been implicated in the criminal case due to some personal dispute between the parties.

(2.) Lastly, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that during the pendency of the present bail application, the petitioner and the prosecutrix have entered into a compromise and settled their dispute amicably. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that petitioner is in judicial custody since 23/1/2024; and the trial of the case will take sufficiently long time to conclude; therefore, no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner behind the bars for an indefinite period. On these grounds, learned counsel for the petitioner prayed that the petitioner may be enlarged on bail. Learned Public Prosecutor as well as learned counsel for the complainant have vehemently opposed the bail application. However, learned counsel for the complainant submitted that since the parties have settled their dispute amicably, therefore, he has not objection, in case petitioner is enlarged on bail.

(3.) Having considered the rival submissions, facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merits/demerits of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.