Rajasthan High Court – Jodhpur
Kuldeep Alias Kalu vs State Of Rajasthan on 2 July, 2026
Author: Ashok Kumar Jain
Bench: Ashok Kumar Jain
[2026:RJ-JP:29720]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
AT JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 3687/2026
CNR: RJHC010256082026
URN: CRLMB / 8306U / 2026
Kuldeep Alias Kalu S/o Dholuram, Aged About 24 Years, Resident
Of 1M.s.d. Madhewali Dhani, Police Station Jaitpur, District
Sriganganagar. ( Presently Lodged In Central Jail, Sri
Ganganagar.)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Public Prosecutor.
----Respondent
Connected With
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 542/2025
CNR: RJHC010021052025
URN: CRLMB / 1276U / 2025
Salendra Singh @ Chhinda S/o Shri Manjeet Singh, Aged About
22 Years, R/o Chak 18 Sd , P.s. Jaitsar , Dist Sriganganagar
(Raj.) (At Present Lodged In Sub Jail, Suratgarh)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 3981/2025
CNR: RJHC010297782025
URN: CRLMB / 8659U / 2025
Vinod Kumar S/o Ramkumar, Aged About 20 Years, R/o 01 M S D
(Maghewali Dhani ) Police Station Jaitsar District Sriganganagar
(Lodged In Central Jail, Sriganganagar)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent
(Uploaded on 07/07/2026 at 07:16:55 PM)
(Downloaded on 07/07/2026 at 08:35:43 PM)
[2026:RJ-JP:29720] (2 of 7) [CRLMB-3687/2026]
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Jayant Garg
Mr. Trilok Joshi
Mr. Kaushal Gautam
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Lalit Kishor Sen, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN
Order
02/07/2026
1. The present bail applications under Section 483 of BNSS are
filed by the applicants-accused (1) Kuldeep Alias Kalu,
(2) Salendra Singh @ Chhinda & (3) Vinod Kumar
seeking bail in respect of a criminal case registered as FIR
No.79/2023 dated 21.03.2023 registered at P.S. Jaitsar,
District – Ganganagar, for the offence under Sections 366,
2. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the
applicants have been falsely implicated in the matter and the
investigation against them are complete and they are no
more required in investigation. They further submits that
there are no chance of fleeing of applicants accused from the
jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court. The applicants do not have
any criminal antecedents. They also submits that the
applicants undertake not to repeat offence and cooperate
with investigation/trial, which will take time.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant-accused Salendra Singh @
Chhinda submits that as per facts narrated in FIR by
prosecutrix shows that she was accompanied with present
petitioner and Goldy and when present accused-applicant
was attempting for physical relation then Vinod and Kuldeep
(Uploaded on 07/07/2026 at 07:16:55 PM)
(Downloaded on 07/07/2026 at 08:35:43 PM)
[2026:RJ-JP:29720] (3 of 7) [CRLMB-3687/2026]
have reached at spot and they have captured a video of the
incident. He also submitted that the entire material on
record clearly indicate that the present accused-applicant
was having friendship and affair with the prosecutrix, who
was 20 years old female at the time of incident. He also
submitted that the prosecutrix was examined as PW/1 before
the Trial Court and her cross examination clearly suggests
that she was having consensual relation with present
accused-applicant and only because of friendship she
accompanied with the present applicant to a place where the
prosecutrix was assaulted and raped by other persons. He
also submitted that the present applicant was neither
involved in the incident nor was the part of any conspiracy
with other accused. He also submitted that the allegation
upon the present applicant is that he fled from the spot
leaving the prosecutrix. At last he submitted that the present
applicant is in custody since his arrest and there is no
allegation against the petitioner for involvement in the
incident of rape.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of Vinod Kumar has
submitted that the present applicant is in custody since
22.03.2023 and till date the trial has not been concluded. He
also submitted that there are twenty-eight witnesses and as
per prosecution twenty-one witnesses have been examined
so far. He also submitted that the allegation against present
applicant is to capture a video but the same has not been
proved against the applicant. He also submitted that even
the prosecutrix in her examination-in-chief has not alleged
(Uploaded on 07/07/2026 at 07:16:55 PM)
(Downloaded on 07/07/2026 at 08:35:43 PM)
[2026:RJ-JP:29720] (4 of 7) [CRLMB-3687/2026]
that the present applicant has committed rape with her. He
also referred cross-examination and submitted that during
investigation, no identification parade was conducted by
Police to identify involvement of petitioner.
5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant
Kuldeep @ Kalu has also submitted that the entire case is
false and concocted and the applicant is in custody for last
more than three years and trial has not been concluded. He
also referred the material available on record in particular
cross-examination of PW/1 and submitted that except the
bald allegation no other material allegation is proved against
the applicant.
6. Learned counsel for the applicants have submitted that
neither the medical examination nor the FSL report has
supported the allegation of prosecution. They also submitted
that at the time of incident the age of prosecutrix was more
than twenty years and her testimony is not reliable. He also
submitted that except the oral testimony nothing has been
brought on record against the applicants. They also
submitted that the applicants are in custody for quite long
time and the trial has not been concluded, therefore, they
are entitled to bail only on the ground of delay in trial.
7. Learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the bail
applications and submitted that the allegations are grave
and serious in nature. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted
that it is a case of gang-rape, therefore, applicants are not
entitled to be released on bail.
(Uploaded on 07/07/2026 at 07:16:55 PM)
(Downloaded on 07/07/2026 at 08:35:43 PM)
[2026:RJ-JP:29720] (5 of 7) [CRLMB-3687/2026]
8. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned Public
Prosecutor. Perused the material placed on record by both
the parties.
9. On basis of report dated 21.03.2023 about the incident of
same day committed by several persons, FIR No.79/2023
dated 21.03.2023 was registered as Police Station Jaitsar,
District Ganganagar for offence under Sections 366, 376-D,
377, 382 and 384 of IPC. After investigation, Police has filed
a charge-sheet against Salendra Singh @ Chhinda, Ishwar
Singh @ Goldy, Vinod Kumar, Kuldeep @ Kalu, Dalip @
Deepu @ Pathan and Akash. The allegation upon Salendra
Singh @ Chhinda are under Sections 366, 376/511, 120-B
and 382 IPC, whereas allegation upon Vinod and Kuldeep @
Kalu are under Sections 376, 376-D, 377 & 506 IPC and
Sections 66 & 67 of I.T. Act. Statement of victim were
recorded as PW/1 and we have considered her statement in
particular cross-examination.
10. After arrest of Kuldeep @ Kalu the Police has recovered his
mobile and prepared a transcription of the video and audio
clip. Similarly after arrest of Vinod Kumar a transcription has
also been prepared. As per Police investigation there is no
allegation of gang rape against Salendra Singh @ Chhinda
but there are allegations of gang rape against Vinod Kumar
and Kuldeep @ Kalu. The FSL report dated 24.05.2023
indicate that human semen and blood were detected on
underwear, Salvar and kurta of victim. The human semen
was detected from stole (dupatta) recovered from crime
scene which belongs to victim. The report also indicate that
(Uploaded on 07/07/2026 at 07:16:55 PM)
(Downloaded on 07/07/2026 at 08:35:43 PM)
[2026:RJ-JP:29720] (6 of 7) [CRLMB-3687/2026]
human semen and human blood were recovered from
vaginal swab and vaginal smear of victim whereas human
semen was detected from anal swab of victim.
11. We have considered the conclusion drawn after DNA analysis
and for sake of gravity we are not discussing the same. I
have considered the gravity of the incident in particular from
the evidence brought on record including as that of PW/1
(victim) and after considering the entirety of her evidence, I
am of the considered view that looking to the incident with
prosecutrix it is a very serious and heinous act.
12. The admission of PW/1 indicate that there was a friendship
between Salendra Singh @ Chhinda and prosecutrix but
Salendra Singh @ Chhinda has left the prosecutrix in a
situation where she was gang raped by atleast 2-3 persons,
therefore, considering his role and involvement, I am of the
considered view that he is also not entitled to bail, as
whatever has been lost cannot be recovered or paid back to
the prosecutrix, who never expected to suffer such an ordeal
at the hands of the accused. Other accused are charged for
gang rape and PW-1 has established their presence.
13. The facts and the material indicate that the alleged offence
are of serious nature and role attributed to applicants are
prima facie sufficient to consider complicity of applicants in
the crime. Therefore, at this juncture, considering the
evidence collected so far, this is not a fit case to enlarge the
applicants accused on bail.
(Uploaded on 07/07/2026 at 07:16:55 PM)
(Downloaded on 07/07/2026 at 08:35:43 PM)
[2026:RJ-JP:29720] (7 of 7) [CRLMB-3687/2026]
14. Considering the gravity of allegations and overall facts and
circumstances of the case, it is appropriate to dismiss the
bail applications of the applicants accused at this stage.
15. Accordingly, the applications for bail filed under Section 483
of BNSS preferred by (1) Kuldeep Alias Kalu, (2)
Salendra Singh @ Chhinda & (3) Vinod Kumar are
hereby dismissed.
(ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J
147-149/Ishan Dixit/359
(Uploaded on 07/07/2026 at 07:16:55 PM)
(Downloaded on 07/07/2026 at 08:35:43 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
