Rajasthan High Court – Jodhpur
Urn: Crlmb / 12709U / 2026Khemaram vs State Of Rajasthan (2026:Rj-Jd:22212) on 8 May, 2026
[2026:RJ-JD:22212]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 5686/2026
Khemaram S/o Shri Pannaram, Aged About 25 Years, Resident
Of Rupana Jetana, Police Station Lohawat, District Phalodi
Rajasthan
(At Present Lodged In Central Jail, Jodhpur)
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor
2. Ranaram S/o Shri Jagroopa Ram, Resident Of Rupana
Jetana, Police Station Lohawat, District Phalodi
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. K.L. Vishnoi for Mr. Mr. Pritam
Solanki
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Pawan Bhati, PP
Mr. Dinesh Singh for respondent No.2
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUKESH RAJPUROHIT
Order
08/05/2026
The instant 3rd application for bail under Section 483 of BNSS
(439 of Cr.P.C.) has been filed by the petitioner who has been
arrested in the present matter. The requisite details of the matter
are tabulated herein below:
S. No. Particulars of the case
1. FIR Number 165/2025
2. Police Station Lohawat
3. District Phalodi
4. Offences alleged in the FIR Under Sections 137(2), 65(1)
& 70(2) of BNS and Sections 3
& 4 of the POCSO Act
5. Offences added, if any Under Section 126(2), 351(2)
& 3(5) of BNS and Sections 7,
8, 5g & 6 of POCSO Act
The 1st bail application filed on behalf of the petitioner i.e.
S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.11878/2025 was dismissed
as not pressed by this Court vide order dated 17.11.2025 with a
(Uploaded on 08/05/2026 at 02:38:27 PM)
(Downloaded on 09/05/2026 at 04:18:14 AM)
[2026:RJ-JD:22212] (2 of 4) [CRLMB-5686/2026]
liberty to the petitioner to file fresh bail application after filing of
the charge-sheet. After filing of charge-sheet, 2nd bail application
being S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.547/2026 filed which
was also dismissed as not pressed by this Court vide order dated
18.02.2026 with a liberty to the petitioner to file fresh bail
application after recording of the statement of the prosecutrix.
Since, the statement of prosecutrix has been recorded as PW-1,
hence this 3rd bail application.
It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the
petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. He submitted
that the prosecutrix has been examined before the learned trial
Court as PW-1. The prosecutrix in her statement has though
stated that the petitioner was present in the car along with the co-
accused Bhanwaruram and Dalaram, however, she has levelled
any allegation against the present petitioner. The allegations have
been levelled only on the co-accused Bhanwaruram and Dalaram.
The relevant extract of the statement of the prosecutrix (PW-1) is
reproduced as under:-
“eq[; ijh{k.k&———-Ldwy ls FkksMk lk vkxs x;s rks ,d fLo¶V dkj vk;h]
dkj esa Hkao:jke] nkykjke] [ksekjke cSBs FksA fLo¶V dkj vk;h rc eSa vdsyh
gh Fkh vkSj esjs lkFk nksLr Fkh mudk ?kj igys gksus ls oks ?kj pyh x;hA
xkMh ls Hkao:jke us mrj dj esjh duiêh ij fiLrkSy j[kh vkSj Hkao:jke
vkSj nkykjke us eq>s tcjnLrh xkMh esa cSBk;k] mUgksaus eq>s dgk fd ge tSlk
dgrs gS oSlk dke dj ugha rks ge rsjs ifjokj dks ekj nsaxsA xkMh esa Hkao:jke
vkSj nkykjke us esjs diMs mrkj fn;s vkSj Hkao:jke us esjs xqIrkaxksa esa maxyh
MkyhA Hkao:jke vkSj nkykjke us esjk xkMh esa ohfM;ks cuk;k Fkk- ckn esa eSa
tksj ls fpYyk;h Fkh rks os rhuksa yksx eq>s ogha NksMdj Hkkx x;sA fQj eSaus ?
kj tkdj ?kVuk ds ckjs esa viuh eEeh dks crk;k] rc esjs firk us eqdnek
ntZ djk;kA xokg dks oh-lh ls mifLFkr eqyfte [ksekjke dks ihfMrk dks
fn[kk;s tkus ij ihfMrk us dFku fd;k fd xkMh esa ;g O;fä ugha FkkA iqfyl
fjiksVZ djokus ds vxys fnu tgka ls eq>s xkMh esa cSBk;k x;k Fkk] ogka
vfHk;qä Hkao:jke] nkykjke vkSj [ksekjke mldk ekSdk fn[kk;k FkkA iqfyl us
mldh QnZ cukdj esjs gLrk{kj Hkh djok;s FksA vxys fnu iqfyl us esjk
esfMdy Hkh djok;k FkkA iqfyl us esjs c;ku Hkh fy;s Fks vkSj eftLVªsV ds
lkeus Hkh c;ku djok;s FksA iqfyl us esjs 10oha d{kk dk çek.k i= Hkh fy;k(Uploaded on 08/05/2026 at 02:38:27 PM)
(Downloaded on 09/05/2026 at 04:18:14 AM)
[2026:RJ-JD:22212] (3 of 4) [CRLMB-5686/2026]Fkk] ftldk iqfyl us QksVkd‚ih dj feyku dj d‚ih vius ikl j[kh vkSj
ewy eq>s ns fn;k FkkA nloh dk çek.k i= çn’kZ ih 2 gSA
ftjg }kjk vf/koäk vfHk;qä& ;g lgh gS fd iqfyl us esjs tks c;ku çn’kZ
Mh1 esa , ls ch Hkkx esa eSaus iqfyl dks ;g crk fn;k Fkk fd eSa [ksekjke dks
ugha tkurh gwa tks lgh fy[kk gqvk gSA ;g lgh gS fd iqfyl us esjh dHkh
eqyfteku ls igpku dh dksbZ dk;Zokgh ugha dhA ;g Hkh lgh gS fd eSaus
ftl [ksekjke dk vius c;kuksa esa ftd fd;k gS ml [ksekjke dh igpku Hkh
iqfyl us eq>ls ughadjok;hA xkao esa [ksekjke uke ds fdrus vkneh gS eq>s
ugha irk gSA ;g dguk lgh gS fd oh-lh ls mifLFkr eqyfte us eq>s jkLrs
pyrs ugha jksdk] uk eq>s tcjnLrh xkMh esa Mkyk] uk gh mlus esjs lax dksbZ
ySafxd vijk/k fd;k vkSj uk gh esjs xqIrkaxksa esa maxyh MkyhA”
Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that out
total 19 witnesses, only 1 witness has been examined till date. He
further submitted that since, the statement of prosecutrix has
been recorded, there is no chance of tampering the said witness.
Learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner is in custody
since 13.09.2025 and the trial of the case will take sufficiently
long time to conclude, therefore, the benefit of bail may be
granted to the accused-petitioner.
Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel
for the complainant have vehemently opposed the bail application
and submitted that looking to the allegation levelled against the
petitioner, he may not be enlarged on bail. However, they do not
refute the fact that in the statement of prosecutrix recorded
before the trial Court as PW-1 no allegation of rape has been
levelled against the petitioner.
Having heard and considered the rival submissions, facts and
circumstances of the case as well as perused the material
available on record; considering the statement of prosecutrix
recorded before the trial Court as PW-1, where no allegation of
rape has been levelled against the petitioner and the fact that
petitioner is in custody since 13.09.2025 and out of total 19
(Uploaded on 08/05/2026 at 02:38:27 PM)
(Downloaded on 09/05/2026 at 04:18:14 AM)
[2026:RJ-JD:22212] (4 of 4) [CRLMB-5686/2026]
witnesses, only one witness has been examined till date and the
trial of the case will take significant time to conclude, without
expressing any opinion on merits/demerits of the case, this Court
is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.
Consequently, the 3rd bail application under Section 483 of
BNSS (439 of Cr.P.C.) is allowed. It is ordered that the accused-
petitioner as named in the cause title, arrested in connection with
the above mentioned FIR, 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.
(MUKESH RAJPUROHIT),J
281-Ramesh/-
(Uploaded on 08/05/2026 at 02:38:27 PM)
(Downloaded on 09/05/2026 at 04:18:14 AM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
