Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2025 DAILYLAW 22436 (RAJ)

RAJKUMAR S/O SHRI ARJUNLAL v. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CRLMB/8055/2025 · 2025-06-26

Anil Kumar Upman

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2025:RJ-JP:23569] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 8055/2025 Rajkumar S/o Shri Arjunlal, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Nora Wali Dhani, Gram Rampurabas, Police Station Toonga, Distt. Jaipur Rural (Raj.) (Presently Confined In District Jail Jaipur). ----Accused-Petitioner Versus The State of Rajasthan, Through P.P. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kailash Chand Meena For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rishi Raj Singh Rathore, P.P. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN (V. J.) Order 26/06/2025 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.16/2025-26 registered at Police Station Excise Prohibition Squad, Chaksu, District Jaipur (Raj.) for the offences punishable under Sections 19/54 and 54A of the Rajasthan Excise Act. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel submits that petitioner was not aware about the fact that co-accused persons were carrying illicit liquor. It is contended that there are no criminal antecedents against the petitioner and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. It is further contended that [2025:RJ-JP:23569] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-8055/2025] petitioner is in custody since 10.06.2025 and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner. 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 parties; especially the fact that alleged offences are triable by magistrate, there are no criminal antecedents against the petitioner and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion as well as looking to the custody period, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it fit and proper to allow this bail application. 6. This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner Rajkumar S/o Shri Arjunlal 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 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. [2025:RJ-JP:23569] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-8055/2025] 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. 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. ANIL KUMAR UPMAN (V. J.)),J Yogesh Kumar/86