LUCKY @ BHAWANI SINGH S/O SHRI SHERSINGH v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN
CRLMB/5309/2025 · 2025-07-29
Anil Kumar Upman
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 15964 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 15964 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2025:RJ-JP:28976] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 5309/2025 Lucky @ Bhawani Singh S/o Shri Shersingh, Aged About 24 Years, R/o Nangal Shalod, Police Station Nijampur, District Mahendragarh Haryana (Raj.) (At Present Accused Confined In Central Jail Jaipur). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rahul Agarwal For Respondent(s) : Mr. Tapesh Agarwal, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN
Order 29/07/2025
1. The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS, on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.258/2024 registered at Police Station Bagru, District Jaipur (West) for the offence punishable under Section 394 of IPC. After completion of investigation, police filed charge-sheet in this matter.
2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. It is submitted that no evidence is available on record to connect the petitioner with the alleged offence. It is submitted that alleged offence is triable by Magistrate. It is submitted that petitioner has been made accused in this case simply on the basis of the fact that in past, 11 other cases were registered against him. It is
[2025:RJ-JP:28976] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-5309/2025] argued that co-accused Somveer @ Sonu has already been granted benefit of bail by learned trial court. It is contended that trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. Counsel contends that petitioner is in custody since 27.11.2024 and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose.
3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposes the
submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner. He submits that petitioner is a habitual offender as 11 other cases have been registered against him.
4. I have considered the contentions.
5. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner, especially the fact that alleged offence is triable by Magistrate; co-accused Somveer @ Sonu has already been granted benefit of bail by learned trial court; petitioner is in custody since 27.11.2024, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it proper to allow the bail application.
6. This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner - Lucky @ Bhawani Singh S/o Shri Shersingh, shall be released on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court with the stipulation that he shall appear before that Court and any court to which the matter is transferred, on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to
[2025:RJ-JP:28976] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-5309/2025] do so.
7. It is made clear that the accused-petitioner shall not involve in any other offence(s) during currency of the bail and he shall mark his presence in first week of every month in the concerned police station, till trial is concluded.
8. Concerned SHO is directed to maintain a register recording the attendance of the petitioner, as directed above. In case the petitioner fails to mark his presence in the concerned police station, as directed above, the concerned SHO is directed to immediately report the matter to the concerned Court in this regard.
9. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the concerned SHO for necessary compliance.
10. If any breach of these conditions is reported or come to the notice of the Court, the same shall alone be a reason for the trial Court to cancel the bail granted to him by this Court.
11. The observations made hereinabove is only for the decision of the instant bail application and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner.
(ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J CHARU SONI /98