SADIQ HUSSAIN @ JAHID @ CHITI S/O MOHAMMAD SUBRATI v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN
CRLMB/16525/2025 · 2026-03-25
Anoop Kumar Dhand
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 2053 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 2053 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 16525/2025 Sadiq Hussain @ Jahid @ Chiti S/o Mohammad Subrati, R/o Talheti Mohalla, Kaithun, Police Station Kaithun, Kota Gramin (Rajasthan) (At Present Confined In Central Jail -Kota, Raj.) ----Petitioner Versus State of Rajasthan, through PP, Kota. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Ms.Anushree Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr.N.S. Dhakar, PP Mr.Vivek Choudhary, PP JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND
Order 25/03/2026
1.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the alleged offence is triable by Magistrate and the petitioner has been in custody since 16.10.2025 and the trial will take its own time to conclude, therefore, indulgence of bail may be granted to the petitioner.
2. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposes the prayer and submits that the petitioner is a habitual offender, against whom 49 cases have been registered with different Police Stations, and he is in a habit of repeating and committing the same offence again and again, therefore, indulgence of bail may not be granted to the petitioner and the bail application submitted by the petitioner is liable to be rejected.
3. Heard and considered the submissions made at the Bar and perused the material available on record.
(2 of 2) [CRLMB-16525/2025]
4. Considering the arguments put forward by the learned Public Prosecutor and looking to the fact that the dozens of cases are pending against the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to entertain and accept the instant bail application, submitted by the petitioner at this stage. Hence, the same stands rejected.
5. However, it is made clear that the trial is not concluded against the petitioner within a period of four months from the date of receipt of this certified copy of the order, the petitioner would be at liberty to move an application for renewal of his prayer.
(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Aayush Sharma /27