[Cites 10, Cited by 0]
Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Vipin vs State Of Rajasthan (2026:Rj-Jd:9770) on 24 February, 2026
[2026:RJ-JD:9770]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 15057/2025
Vipin S/o Shri Maganlal, Aged About 19 Years, R/o Khandi Oberi,
Nichla Fala, Police Station Kherwada District Udaipur (Presently
Lodged In Central Jail Udaipur)
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through PP
2. Mamta W/o Rakesh Kharadi, R/o Nichla Mandwa, Police
Station Kalyanpur District Udaipur Raj.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ojas Shakdwipeeya
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Hanuman Singh Prajapat, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL BENIWAL
Order
24/02/2026
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
2. Date of lodging FIR 01.10.2025
3. Concerned Police Station Kalyanpur (Udaipur)
4. District Udaipur
5. Offences alleged in the FIR Section 137 (2) of
BNS, 2023
6. Offences added, if any Section 64(1), 61(2)
(a), 127(2) and 3(5)
of BNS, 2023 and
Sections 3, 4, 16 and
17 of the POCSO Act
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner
has been falsely implicated in the case and false allegations have
(Uploaded on 24/02/2026 at 03:00:21 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:9770] (2 of 4) [CRLMB-15057/2025]
been levelled against him. The FIR was lodged by the mother of
the victim alleging that her daughter was missing and some
unknown person had abducted her. After investigation, the
petitioner and the co-accused - Rakesh, were arrested. The
statement of the victim under Section 180 of the Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) was recorded, wherein
she stated that she had received a call from one Sanjay, who had
been in contact with her for the last three months. She further
stated that when she was asked to come outside her house. Two
men came on a motorcycle to pick her up. She went out and
without verifying whether it was Sanjay, she went away with them
on the motorcycle. Thereafter, they took her to a kachcha house
near Khandi Obri where Vipin committed sexual assault on her.
2.1 Subsequently, her statement under Section 183 BNSS was
recorded, wherein she stated that she had received a message on
Instagram from one Vipin. When Vipin asked her to meet him, she
went on a motorcycle with him. She further stated that Vipin took
her to his aunt's house and committed rape on her. Thereafter,
Vipin dropped her near her house and then her brother took her
home.
2.2 It is further submitted that the statement of the victim was
also recorded before the Court and she was subjected to an
identification parade in which the present petitioner and Rakesh
were present, however, she was not able to identify either of
them.
2.3 Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the
petitioner is about 19 years of age, whereas the victim is aged
about 16 years and two months. Considering the adolescent age
(Uploaded on 24/02/2026 at 03:00:21 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:9770] (3 of 4) [CRLMB-15057/2025]
of the petitioner so also the petitioner is in judicial custody since
08.10.2025 and the trial will take sufficiently long time, therefore,
he deserves to be enlarged on bail.
3. Learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposes this bail
application and submits that the prosecutrix has specifically
alleged the commission of penetrative sexual assault in her
statements recorded under Sections 180 and 183 of the BNSS, as
well as in her statement recorded before the Court. Though she
did not identify the present petitioner in the test identification
parade, in view of her affirmative statement alleging sexual
assault against the present petitioner, he is not entitled to be
enlarged on bail.
4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public
Prosecutor and perused the material available on record.
5. Having considered the rival submissions, facts and
circumstances of this case and after perusing the challan papers
more particularly the statements recorded under Section 180 of
the BNSS wherein the prosecutrix stated that she received a
message from Sanjay and subsequently in her statement under
Section 183 of the BNSS, she stated that she received a message
from Vipin; further considering the fact that she was not able to
identify the present petitioner in the test identification parade as
well as keeping in view the adolescent age of the petitioner, 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
(Uploaded on 24/02/2026 at 03:00:21 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:9770] (4 of 4) [CRLMB-15057/2025]
is of the opinion that the bail application filed by the petitioner
deserves to be accepted.
6. Accordingly, the bail application filed under Section 483 of
BNSS is allowed. It is ordered that petitioner- Vipin S/o Shri
Maganlal 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
6-Ashutosh/-
(Uploaded on 24/02/2026 at 03:00:21 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
