Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2025 DAILYLAW 23284 (RAJ)

MOHANLAL GUPTA S/O RAMKUVAR GUPTA v. STATE OF RAJSTHAN

CRLMB/8489/2025 · 2025-09-04

Anil Kumar Upman

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2025:RJ-JP:35665] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 8489/2025 Mohanlal Gupta S/o Ramkuvar Gupta, Aged About 65 Years, R/o Varishth Upadhyay Bhartiya Shakarita Mission, Address 18 A -17 Falodi Enterprises, S.B.I. Bank, Mahveer Nagar, Kota And Plot No. 202 Shri Krishan Tower, Kota. (At Present Confined In Central Jail Jaipur). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajsthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Manish Kumar Mr. Dinesh Jat For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 04/09/2025 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.263/2024 registered at Police Station Vaishali Nagar, District Jaipur (West) for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468, 471 & 120B of IPC. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. It is contended that alleged offences are triable by Magistrate. It is contended that no amount was transferred in the bank account of the petitioner. Entire amount obtained from various persons was deposited in the account of co-accused Upendra Singh Rudradev and his wife. It is contended that petitioner has been implicated in as many as 18 other cases and in maximum cases, benefit of bail [2025:RJ-JP:35665] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-8489/2025] has been granted to the petitioner by this Court as well as Co- ordinate Bench of this Court. Trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. It is argued that petitioner is in custody since 22.10.2023 in respect of separate FIR. Thereafter, he is in continuous custody. It is argued that on 30.05.2025, arrest of the petitioner has been made in the present case. Further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposes the prayer of bail made by learned counsel for the petitioner. 4. Heard. Perused the material available on record. 5. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances; considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner as also the fact that alleged offences are triable by Magistrate and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion as well as looking to the custody period, but without expressing any opinion on merits/demerits of this case, I deem it proper to allow the bail application. 6. This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner - Mohanlal Gupta S/o Ramkuvar Gupta, 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. [2025:RJ-JP:35665] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-8489/2025] 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. 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. 10. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the concerned SHO for necessary compliance. 11. The observations made hereinabove are only for 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 /73