Friday, 15, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Ravidas vs State Of Rajasthan
2021 Latest Caselaw 8971 Raj

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 8971 Raj
Judgement Date : 7 April, 2021

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Ravidas vs State Of Rajasthan on 7 April, 2021
Bench: Sandeep Mehta

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 4314/2021

Ravidas S/o Sharandas, Aged About 31 Years, By Caste Valmiki, R/o Ratanada, Near Naval Ashram, Bhati Circle, Jodhpur, Rajasthan.

----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P.

                                                                  ----Respondent


For Petitioner(s)        :     Mr. Anil Limba
For Respondent(s)        :     Mr. Farzand Ali, AAG-cum-GA
                               Mr. Gaurav Singh, PP
                               Mr. Sikander Khan for complainant



             HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA

                                Judgment

07/04/2021

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case

diary.

This anticipatory bail application has been filed by the

petitioner apprehending his arrest in connection with FIR

No.67/2021, registered at Police Station Boranada, District

Jodhpur for offences under Sections 376 & 384 of the IPC.

Learned counsel Shri Limba points that the above-mentioned

FIR is the third FIR of rape lodged by the complainant Smt.'G'

against the petitioner. He urges that manifestly, the complainant is

misusing criminal law as a tool for extorting money from the

petitioner. He points out that the petitioner is facing trial in

connection with FIR No.18/2018 PS Ratanada lodged by the

complainant Smt. 'G' for the offence under Section 376 IPC.

(2 of 3) [CRLMB-4314/2021]

Thereafter, she lodged yet another FIR No.279 dated 04.11.2020

against the petitioner for the same offence at the Police Station

Devnagar, District Jodhpur City West wherein the investigating

officer submitted a negative final report. The complainant was

given notice of the FR upon which she appeared in the

magistrate's court on 04.01.2021 and gave in writing that she was

not desirous of any action in connection with the said FIR

(No.279/2020). Two months later, i.e., 05.03.2021, she has

lodged the present FIR (No.67/2021) alleging that the petitioner

called her to the D.K. Excellency Hotel, D.P.S. Circle on

01.01.2021 where he showed some indecent photographs of her,

saved on his mobile and subjected her to forcible sexual

intercourse and also snatched her ornaments etc.

Learned counsel Shri Limba urges that ex-facie, the tenor of

the allegations as set out in the FIR is patently false and

fabricated. As per him, if there was even an iota of truth in the

allegations of the prosecutrix that she had been subjected to rape

on 01.01.2021, then she would not have got the FR, referred to

supra, accepted in the court on 04.01.2021. He thus, craves

indulgence of pre-arrest to the petitioner in this case.

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel

representing the complainant vehemently and fervently opposed

the submissions advanced by the petitioner's counsel. However, it

is a matter of record that the present one is the third FIR of rape

lodged by the complainant against the petitioner. The police gave

a negative final report in connection with FIR No.279/2020, notice

whereof was served upon the complainant who appeared in the

court below and got the FR accepted on 04.01.2021. If at all there

had been any iota of truth in the allegation that the complainant

(3 of 3) [CRLMB-4314/2021]

was subjected to rape by the petitioner on 01.012021, then she

would not have casually permitted the above referred FR to be

accepted. She definitely would have protested and rather, could

have made a complaint of the alleged incident dated 01.01.2021

to the Magistrate. On the contrary, she got the FIR at hand

registered after more than two months of the incident.

Thus, having regard to the entirety of facts and

circumstances as available on record, this Court is of the opinion

that it is a fit case to extend the benefit of pre-arrest bail to the

petitioner under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed and it is directed

that in the event of arrest of petitioner Ravidas S/o Shri

Sharandas in connection with FIR No.67/2021, registered at Police

Station Boranada, District Jodhpur, the petitioner shall be released

on bail; provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of

Rs.50,000/- along with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the

satisfaction of the concerned Investigating Officer/S.H.O. on the

following conditions :-

(i). that the petitioner(s) shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

(ii). that the petitioner(s) shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or any police officer; an

(iii). that the petitioner(s) shall not leave India without previous permission of the court.

(SANDEEP MEHTA),J 155-Sudhir Asopa/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter