LOKESH S/O SHYORAM KAJLA v. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN
CRLMB/269/2025 · 2025-02-19
Anil Kumar Upman
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 2447 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 2447 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2025:RJ-JP:7412] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 269/2025 Lokesh S/o Shyoram Kajla, R/o Ward No. 05 Khandela, Police Station Khandela, District Sikar. (At Present Confined In Sub Jail Neem Ka Thana) ----Petitioner Versus The State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vikas Kumar Jakhar For Respondent(s) : Mr. Amit Kumar Gupta, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 19/02/2025
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.393/2020 registered at Police Station Khandela, District Sikar (Raj.) for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323 & 307 of IPC. Later on, police filed charge-sheet in this matter for the offences punishable under Section 341, 323, 325, 307 & 34 of IPC. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel submits that petitioner is not named in the FIR. Counsel submits that except one grievous injury, all other injuries sustained by the injured have been opined as simple in nature and said grievous injury is on the non-vital part of the body. Counsel submits that there is only one criminal antecedent of the petitioner wherein he is on bail. Petitioner is in custody since
[2025:RJ-JP:7412] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-269/2025]
20.12.2024. Further custody of the petitioners would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by the 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 petitioner, as also the fact that petitioner is not named in the FIR; nature of injuries; charge-sheet has been filed in this matter; looking to the custody period, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it proper to allow this bail application. 6.
This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner -Lokesh S/o Shyoram Kajla 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. The observation made hereinabove is 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 LALIT MOHAN /113