Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2025 DIGILAW 622 (RAJ)

Shaym Lal v. State of Rajasthan

2025-03-06

KULDEEP MATHUR

body2025
ORDER : KULDEEP MATHUR, J. 1.This application for bail under Section 483 BNSS has been filed by the petitioner who has been arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.100/2024 registered at Police Station Mangrop, Dist. Bhilwara, for the offences under Sections 363, 366, 343, 376(2) (n), 376-D and 306 of IPC and Sections 5(l)/6, 5(g)/6 of POCSO Act. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. Drawing attention of the Court towards the challan papers and the statements of various witnesses recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., learned counsel submitted that on 19.05.2024, the deceased went away with the petitioner on his motorbike bearing registration No.RJ-06-BS-8575. The deceased who was already married, pressurized the petitioner to accept her as his wife, as presently neither she is able to live with him nor will she able to go to her parent’s or in-law’s house. The petitioner told her that he cannot take a decision in this regard right now as he has no money to pay to her parents and in-laws. Upon this, deceased got annoyed and in the heat of the moment, committed suicide by consuming poisonous seeds/ pulp of kander. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that a bare perusal of the documents available on record would indicate that the allegation of forcible sexual assault levelled against the petitioner is absolutely false. The deceased developed physical relationship with the petitioner out of her own free will and volition. There is no direct evidence available on record suggesting that the petitioner had mens rea or any intention to aid or instigate the deceased to commit suicide. 4. Lastly, learned counsel submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody and the trial of the case will take sufficiently long time, therefore, the benefit of bail may be granted to the accused-petitioner. 5. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application. 6. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record. 7. Having considered the rival submissions, facts and circumstances of the case, this Court prima facie finds that sufficient material is available on record to indicate that the deceased developed sexual relationship with the present petitioner out of her own free and volition. 6. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record. 7. Having considered the rival submissions, facts and circumstances of the case, this Court prima facie finds that sufficient material is available on record to indicate that the deceased developed sexual relationship with the present petitioner out of her own free and volition. This Court prima facie finds that the essential ingredients of offence under Section 306 IPC i.e. (i) the abetment; (ii) the intention of the accused to aid or instigate or abet the deceased to commit suicide are not present in this case. Prima facie, there is no direct evidence available on record to establish that the petitioner had any intention to aid or instigate the deceased to commit suicide. Thus, without expressing any opinion on merits/demerits of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. 8. Consequently, the bail application under Section 483 BNSS is allowed. It is ordered that the accused-petitioner Shaym Lal S/o Gopi Lal arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.100/2024 registered at Police Station Mangrop, Dist. Bhilwara, shall be released on bail, if not wanted in any other case, provided he furnishes a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- and two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each, to the satisfaction of learned trial court, for his appearance before that court on each & every date of hearing and whenever called upon to do so till completion of the trial. 9. It is however, made clear that findings recorded/observations made above are for limited purposes of adjudication of bail application. The trial court shall not get prejudiced by the same.