Rajasthan High Court – Jodhpur
Ashok Kumar vs State Of Rajasthan on 14 July, 2026
[2026:RJ-JP:31274]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
AT JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 3203/2026
CNR: RJHC010254192026
URN: CRLMB / 7324U / 2026
Ashok Kumar S/o Shri Kishan, Aged About 27 Years, Resident
Ofdhobi Mohalla, Kesarganj, Police Station Bijoliya District
Bhilwara. At Present Lodged In District Jail, Bhilwara.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
2. Smt Sushla W/o Mohan Lal, Resident Of
Ganeshpura,police Station Bijoliya District Bhilwara.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Raghuveer Singh Chundawat
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Urja Ram Kalbi, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL BENIWAL
Order
14/07/2026
1. This application for bail has been filed by the petitioner under
Section 483 of BNSS (old Section 439 of Cr.P.C.). The requisite
details of the matter are tabulated herein below:
S.No. Particulars of the Case 1. FIR Number 201/2024 2. Date of lodging FIR 02.07.2024 3. Concerned Police Station Bijolia 4. District Bhilwara 5. Offences alleged in the FIR Section 363 of IPC. 6. Offences added, if any Sections 366-A, 343, 376(2) (n) IPC and Sections 5(l)/6 and 16/17 of POCSO Act. (Uploaded on 14/07/2026 at 05:47:58 PM) (Downloaded on 15/07/2026 at 09:10:57 PM) [2026:RJ-JP:31274] (2 of 4) [CRLMB-3203/2026]
2. At the outset, learned Public Prosecutor submits that notice
upon the respondent No.2 has been served but nobody appeared
on her behalf.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner
has been falsely implicated in the case and false allegations have
been levelled against him. The FIR was lodged on 02.07.2024
while alleging that the victim left her home on 28.06.2024. The
present FIR has been lodged on absolutely false and frivolous
allegations.
3.1 While referring to the statement of prosecutrix recorded
under Section 183 BNSS, learned counsel submits that although
sexual assault has been alleged against the present petitioner,
however, the facts narrated in the statements, clearly indicate that
the petitioner and the victim travelled together at various places
by using public transport. However, no protest whatsoever was
raised by her. This clearly indicates that petitioner and victim
travelled together on their own free will.
3.2 Learned counsel further submits that as far as the age of the
victim is concerned, though she has stated her date of birth to be
06.04.2007, however, such version looses its significance, more
so, considering the fact that the victim, in her statements before
the court deposed that she was married twice and prior to the
incident had also stayed at her in-laws’ house for more than two
years. Apart from this, he submits that there is no medical
evidence indicating any forceful sexual assault. The petitioner is in
judicial custody since 13.08.2025 and the trial will take sufficiently
long time, therefore, he deserves to be enlarged on bail.
(Uploaded on 14/07/2026 at 05:47:58 PM)
(Downloaded on 15/07/2026 at 09:10:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JP:31274] (3 of 4) [CRLMB-3203/2026]
4. Learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposes this bail
application and submits that in view of the statements recorded
under Section 183 BNSS so also before the court, specific
allegation of sexual assault has been made against the petitioner.
Therefore, the petitioner may not be released on bail.
5. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public
Prosecutor and perused the material available on record.
6. Having considered the rival submissions, facts and
circumstances of this case and after perusing the challan papers
so also considering the statement of the victim recorded under
Section 183 BNSS and the statement recorded before the court;
the victim travelled with the petitioner at various places through
public transport and no protest whatsoever was raised during this
period; the victim in her statement before the court admitted the
fact that she got married in the year 2021 and later, remarried
and stayed for two years at her in-laws’ house, which further casts
doubts on her version regarding her age; no supporting medical
evidence is available to indicate forceful sexual assault; and that
the prosecution has not expressed any apprehension qua the
petitioner fleeing away from justice, in case he is enlarged on bail,
in the considered opinion of this Court, no fruitful purpose would
be served by keeping the petitioner behind the bars for an
indefinite period as the trial will take sufficiently long time. Thus,
without expressing any opinion on merits/demerits of the case,
this Court is of the opinion that the bail application filed by the
petitioner deserves to be accepted.
(Uploaded on 14/07/2026 at 05:47:58 PM)
(Downloaded on 15/07/2026 at 09:10:57 PM)
[2026:RJ-JP:31274] (4 of 4) [CRLMB-3203/2026]
6. Accordingly, the bail application filed under Section 483 of
BNSS is allowed. It is ordered that petitioner- Ashok Kumar S/o
Shri Kishan, shall be released on bail in connection with the
aforesaid FIR; provided he executes personal bond in the sum of
Rs.50,000/- with two sound and solvent sureties of Rs.25,000/-
each to the satisfaction of learned trial Court for his appearance
before that court on each and every date of hearing and whenever
called upon to do so till the completion of the trial.
7. 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.
(SUNIL BENIWAL),J
9/Ajay Singh/663
(Uploaded on 14/07/2026 at 05:47:58 PM)
(Downloaded on 15/07/2026 at 09:10:57 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
