RAMCHANDRA @ BABA S/O PRAHLAD v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN
/3494/2025 · 2025-03-12
Ganesh Ram Meena
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 10584 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 10584 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2025:RJ-JP:11381] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 2nd Bail Application No. 3494/2025 Ramchandra @ Baba S/o Prahlad, Aged About 36 Years, R/o Jail Colony, Atru, Police Station Atru, District Baran, Rajasthan. (At Present He Is Confined In District Jail Baran.) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Laxman Meena For Respondent(s) : Mr. Amit Punia, Public Prosecutor HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA Order 12/03/2025
1. The instant second bail application has been filed under Section 483 BNSS on behalf of accused-petitioner in connection with FIR No.147/2024 registered at Police Station Sadar Baran, District Baran for offences under Sections 323, 307, 397, 506 & 34 of IPC and under Section 3/25 of the Arms Act. 2. First bail application of the petitioner bearing S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.7590/2024 was dismissed as withdrawn by this Court with liberty to file fresh bail application after examination of the complainant witness. 3. Heard. 4. Considered the submissions made at bar and also perused the material available on record. [2025:RJ-JP:11381] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-3494/2025]
5. The allegation against the accused-petitioner is that he supplied a weapon to the co-accused, who by the said weapon inflicted injury to the complainant. 6. The complainant has been examined as PW-1. In the statement of the complainant recorded during his examination before the learned trial Court, no allegation has been levelled against the petitioner. 7. It has also come on record that the person who caused firearm injury to the complainant Surendra Kumar Meghwal has also been identified. 8. Taking into consideration the overall facts & circumstances of the case and more particularly the fact that there is no allegation against the petitioner of inflicting any injury to the complainant and he is in custody since 29.05.2024, this Court without expressing any opinion on the merits/demerits of the case, deems just and proper to enlarge the accused-petitioner on bail. 9. Accordingly, this second bail application is allowed and it is ordered that the accused-petitioner named above in connection with the aforesaid FIR shall be enlarged on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/-together with two sureties of Rs.50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for his appearance before the Court concerned on all the dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.
(GANESH RAM MEENA),J Ashish Kumar/Satyendra/44