Rajesh Alias Goldy v. State Of Haryana

CRM-M-14019 of 2026 (O&M) -2threatened and police was also pressurising her, no proper investigation was being done. They threatened to kill her and make her videos viral on social media, if she told anyone.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after the dismissal of the first petition for bail on 03.07.2025, 9 months had gone by and trial was not proceeding at the desired pace. Petitioner was behind bars for more than two years and five months. Out of 33 witnesses, only 11 were examined and there was no prospect of the trial concluding by an early date, therefore, petitioner deserved to be enlarged on bail. Learned State counsel has filed status report alongwith custody certificate contesting the bail application. Assisted by Mr. M.R. Sharma, he opposes the prayer for bail on the ground that petitioner's SLP challenging order dated 03.07.2025 of this Court had been dismissed by Hon'ble the Supreme Court of India, on 20.01.2026 and there was no fresh ground to release the petitioner on bail.

It is settled principle that while considering a subsequent bail application, the Court must evaluate the reason for rejection of the earlier application. Having regard to the hierarchical judicial system, the findings of a Co-ordinate Bench in the first bail petition must receive serious consideration. While declining the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner in the case of gang rape of the prosecutrix, a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court was mindful of the serious allegations of sexual exploitation of the victim by the petitioner alongwith others, by putting her under threat and blackmailing her continuously. Even though sometime has elapsed after dismissal of the bail petition, given the serious and grave nature of allegations, incarceration of 9 months alone cannot furnish a fresh ground to release the petitioner on

CRM-M-14019 of 2026 (O&M) -3bail particularly when his SLP against the order dated 03.07.2025 has been declined by the Apex Court not long back, on 20.01.2026. There is no convincing and fresh ground to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The application for bail is, therefore, dismissed. All the pending miscellaneous applications, if any, stand disposed of.

(SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL) JUDGE 24.04.2026 reema Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes Whether reportable :

No