Kishanlal vs State Of Rajasthan
2023 Latest Caselaw 5944 Raj

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 5944 Raj
Judgement Date : 16 August, 2023

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Kishanlal vs State Of Rajasthan on 16 August, 2023

Bench: Kuldeep Mathur

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 1420/2023 Kishanlal S/o Nathulal, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Kota, P.s. Raipur Dist. Bhilwara. (Presently Lodged In Central Jail, Bhilwara)

----Appellant Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

2. Pushpa Salvi W/o Kishanlal Salvi, R/o Shahpura, Bhilwara.

                                                                ----Respondents



For Appellant(s)          :    Mr.Umesh Kant Vyas.
For Respondent(s)         :    Mr.Laxman Solanki, P.P.


         HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR
                         Judgment
16/08/2023

The instant appeal under Section 14A(2) of the Scheduled

Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has

been filed by the appellant against the order dated 12.7.2023

passed by learned Special Judge, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled

Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act Cases, Bhilwara in Cr.Misc.

Case No.178/2023, whereby the bail application filed by the

appellant, who has been arrested in connection with FIR

No.284/2022 registered at Police Station Shahpura, District

Bhilwara, for offences under Sections 354 of IPC and 67-67-A of

Information Technology Act, 3(2)(va) of Scheduled Castes and

Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, has been rejected.

As per prosecution, the prosecutrix was having consensual

relationship with one Chunni Lal. The allegation against the

present appellant is that he obtained obscene photographs of

prosecutrix and Chunni Lal. Further allegation against the present

appellant is that he threatened the prosecutrix to enter into

(2 of 3) [CRLAS-1420/2023]

physical relations with him and also demanded a sum of Rs.2 lacs,

otherwise her obscene photographs would be made viral.

Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the

appellant, who is aged about 32 years has been falsely implicated

in the present case. Learned counsel submitted that the appellant

did not have any access to the mobile phone of prosecutrix or that

of co-accused Chunni Lal and, therefore, he could not have

obtained their obscene photographs. Learned counsel submitted

that as a matter of fact, daughter of Chunni Lal provided the

photographs to co-accused Dinesh, who in turn had sent them to

Chunni Lal, by using appellant's phone without his knowledge and

had also deleted the photographs after forwarding the same.

Learned counsel submitted that the appellant is innocent,

however, he has been falsely roped in a criminal case.

Learned counsel submitted that the appellant is in judicial

custody and the trial of the case will take sufficiently long time,

therefore, the benefit of bail should be granted to the accused-

appellant.

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail

application.

Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned Public

Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.

This Court vide order dated 1.8.2023 directed learned Public

Prosecutor to call for the case diary. In compliance of the order

dated 1.8.2023, the case diary has been produced before this

Court for its perusal.

                                                                             (3 of 3)                     [CRLAS-1420/2023]


                                           Having     considered        the      rival     submissions,      facts     and

circumstances of the case and having gone through the case diary,

this Court prima facie finds that there is no material available on

record indicating as to how the present appellant came into

possession of the alleged obscene photographs of the prosecutrix

and co-accused Chunni Lal. This Court prima facie also finds that

the argument advanced by learned counsel for the appellant with

regard to possibility of appellant's mobile phone having been used

by some other person/co-worker for making the obscene

photographs viral, cannot be brushed aside. Thus, without

expressing any opinion on merits/demerits of the case, this Court

is of the opinion that the appellant deserves to be enlarged on

bail.