Dismissed

Vikas Sharma S/O Late Gopal Lal Sharma v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC2 Dec 2025CRLMB/13945/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Three young accused sought bail in an abduction case involving a girl of about 18 years, alleging false implication due to a matrimonial dispute and a shoddy investigation without mobile seizure or FSL examination. The court found the Section 183 BNSS statements specifically implicated one applicant and dismissed all bail applications.

What the court decided

AI extract

Vikas Sharma S/O Late Gopal Lal Sharma Vs State of Rajasthan — Bail and Remand | Rajasthan HC (2025)

¶1

[2025:RJ-JP:48878]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 13293/2025 Rohit Prajapat @ Guddu S/o Sharwan Lal, Aged About 21 Years, R/o Village Kuthada Khurd, Nayla Road, P.s. Kanota, Jaipur East, Rajasthan. (Confined In Jaipur Jail)

¶4

----Accused-Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

¶7

----Respondent

¶8

Connected With

¶9

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 13903/2025

¶10

Pawan Baswal S/o Shri Devisahaya, Aged About 21 Years, R/o Janta Colony, Behind Kanota Police Station Jaipur East (Raj.) (At Present Accused Confined In Central Jail Jaipur).

¶11

----Accused-Petitioner

¶12

Versus

¶13

State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

¶14

----Respondent

¶15

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 13945/2025 Vikas Sharma S/o Late Gopal Lal Sharma, Aged About 21 Years, R/o Village Ramratanpura Nayla Road Police Station Kanota Jaipur East. (Accused Petitioner At Present Confined In Jail Jaipur).

¶16

----Accused-Petitioner

¶17

Versus

¶18

State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

¶19

----Respondent

¶20

For Petitioner(s)	:	Mr. Hemant Kankoriya Mr. Rahul Agrawal Mr. Dushyant Singh Naruka
For Respondent(s)	:	Mr. Rhishi Raj Singh Rathore, PP with Mr. Sanjeev Nain, DCP (East) through VC Mr. Totaram, IO, PS Bassi Mr. Siya Ram Sharma with Mr. Dinesh Jat
		Ms. Gayatri Sharma
		Ms. Nisha Shekhawat

(2 of 4)

[2025:RJ-JP:48878]

[CRLMB-13293/2025]

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN

¶25

Order

¶26

02/12/2025

¶27

The instant bail applications have been filed under Section 483 BNSS on behalf of accused-applicants. The accused-applicants were arrested in connection with FIR No. 499/2025 registered at Police Station Bassi District Jaipur City (East) for the offence(s) under Section 87 of BNS, 2023.

¶28

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicants have unanimously submitted that the present bail applications are moved by Rohit Prajapat, Pawan Baswal and Vikas Sharma. It is submitted that the applicants are young persons aged about 20-25 years. It is submitted that allegations are levelled qua abduction of a victim aged approximately 18 years and 2 months. It is further submitted that charge-sheet has been filed, and the applicants are having no criminal antecedents registered under their name, rather are pursuing education. It is also submitted that the victim herself negated and was desirous of not having done the medical examination, and there has not been any allegation under the provisions of the Information Technology Act, qua any obscene material. It is submitted that one of the cousin/relative of the complainant was married to applicant-Vikas Sharma on 05.06.2025, and there is some matrimonial dispute ongoing, thence on account of vindictiveness, present FIR is lodged.

¶29

In addition, learned counsel appearing for applicant-Pawan Baswal has submitted that applicant is aged 21 years, and qua him chargesheet has been filed. It is submitted that applicant has a different role rather has been falsely implicated in the matter. It is apprised to the Court that the applicants’ name was never indicated in the FIR, and

[2025:RJ-JP:48878]

[CRLMB-13293/2025]

(3 of 4)

there is no evidence qua video/photos or application of the IT Act. It is submitted that investigation has not found any evidences qua commission of the offence of rape, and the victim herself refuted to get medically examined. It is lastly submitted that no recovery of mobile phone was done during the investigation.

¶34

Per contra , learned counsel for the complainant has submitted that there are strong allegations qua Vikas Sharma, who is alleged of physical abuse/abduction by his own wife for which one FIR numbering 815/2025 dated 05.10.2025 was lodged and applicant concerned was bailed out. It is submitted that the wife of the accused-applicant also leveled similar kind of allegations and marriage is stated to be under pressure of the applicants, except for Pawan.

¶35

It is further submitted that in the present matter, statements recorded under section 183 of BNSS and the charge-sheet filed bears testimony to the prosecution story wherein the girl aged 18 years was abducted in a forceful manner and taken to public places. The victim was however, found by the authorities, immediately on the next date, from lodging of the FIR, and the applicants/accused were arrested within a span of week. It is also submitted that the police authorities have failed in performing their duties, and to make out the case, as they have failed to seize the mobile and send the recording in the FSL department, nonetheless, the lacuna on this part had been vital for investigation.

¶36

Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that wife of one of the applicant has also filed similar kind of complaint; that the nature of allegations leveled are serious in nature; that the girl in question is approximately 18 years; that there is a faulty/shoddy investigation by the police authorities; and in addition to

[CRLMB-13293/2025]

[2025:RJ-JP:48878]

(4 of 4)

the additional arguments raised by the learned counsel for applicantPawan Baswal, this Court has perused the statements tendered/recorded under Section 183 BNSS by the victim in question; that in the said statements the applicant (Pawan Baswal) is specifically alleged for abduction; and upon a cumulative analysis of the instant matter, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the accused-applicants on bail.

¶41

Accordingly, the present bail applications are dismissed.

¶42

A copy of the present order be placed in the connected applications.

¶43

(SAMEER JAIN),J

¶44

DEEPAK/73-75

Vikas Sharma S/O Late Gopal Lal Sharma v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Vikas Sharma S/O Late Gopal Lal Sharma v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Laxman Singh S/O Gopi Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Suraj S/O Kanaram Vs State of Rajasthan

Vikram Singh Meena S/O Shri Jaisingh Meena Vs State of Rajasthan

Sohel S/O Sh. Abdul Majeed Vs State of Rajasthan

Gyansingh @ Lara S/O Babulal Vs State of Rajasthan

Kanhaiya Lal Sharma @ Chiku Pandit S/O Sh. Suresh Kumar Sharma Vs State of Rajasthan