Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2025 DAILYLAW 19355 (RAJ)

ARVIND @ SONU S/O VINOD KUMAR v. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CRLMB/6561/2025 · 2025-07-14

Pramil Kumar Mathur

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2025:RJ-JP:26097] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 6561/2025 1. Arvind @ Sonu S/o Vinod Kumar, Aged About 23 Years, R/o Delsar Khurd, Police Station Nawalgarh, District Jhunjhunu (Raj.) (At Present Confined In District Jail Jhunjhunu) 2. Anil Kumar S/o Shishram, Aged About 23 Years, R/o Gadhla Kalan, Police Station Gudhagaurji, District Jhunjhunu (Raj.) (At Present Confined In District Jail Jhunjhunu) ----Petitioners Versus The State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. OP Jhajhria For Respondent(s) : Mr. Naresh Kumar Gupta, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAMIL KUMAR MATHUR Order 14/07/2025 1. The petitioners have preferred this bail application under Section 483 of BNSS in FIR No.0603/2024 registered at Police Station-Gudha, District-Jhunjhunu for offences under Sections 109(1), 189(2), 324(3), 331(6), 351(2) of BNS. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned Public Prosecutor and perused the material available on record. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. Except Sections 109(1) and 331(6), all other offences are bailable. He argued that there is no medical report which speaks that the alleged injuries are dangerous to life. He further submits that the [2025:RJ-JP:26097] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-6561/2025] petitioners are behind the Bars since 05.04.2025. The trial of the case may take considerable time, therefore no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioners in further custody, hence the bail application of the petitioners may be allowed. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application. 5. On consideration of the rival submission and material available on record and deliberating all the facts and circumstances of the case and without expressing any opinion on the merits/demerits of the case, I am inclined to grant benefit of bail to the petitioners. 6. Accordingly, the bail application under Section 483 B.N.S.S. is allowed and it is ordered that the petitioners-(1) Arvind @ Sonu S/o Vinod Kumar and (2) Anil Kumar S/o Shishram shall be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court for their appearance before that Court on all the dates till conclusion of the trial. (PRAMIL KUMAR MATHUR),J Sunita/163