Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2025 DAILYLAW 27849 (RAJ)

KAPIL KUMAR @ DEVA S/O SHRI PRAHLAD v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CRLMB/10456/2025 · 2025-09-03

Anil Kumar Upman

Public Interest Litigationbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2025:RJ-JP:35401] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 10456/2025 Kapil Kumar @ Deva S/o Shri Prahlad, R/o Ward No. 13, Mandawa, Police Station Mandawa, District Jhunjhunu. (At Present Confined In District Jail Jhunjhunu). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent Connected With S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 10457/2025 Abdul S/o Phool Mohammad, R/o Ward No. 25, Mandawa, Police Station Mandawa, District Jhunjhunu. (At Present Confined In District Jail Jhunjhunu). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Intjar Ali For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 03/09/2025 1. These bail applications have been filed under Section 483 of BNSS on behalf of the petitioners, who have been arrested in connection with FIR No.06/2025 registered at Police Station Mandawa, District Jhunjhunu for the offences under Sections 79, 109(1), 115(2), 189(2), 190, 333, 351(3) and 352 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (in short, ‘BNS’), 2023. After completion of investigation, police filed charge-sheet in this matter for the [2025:RJ-JP:35401] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-10456/2025] offences punishable under Sections 79, 109(1), 115(2), 189(2), 190, 333, 351(3), 117(2), 118(1) and 352 of BNS, 2023. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that the accused-petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel submits that no specific allegation has been levelled against the petitioners of causing injury on the person of the injured and allegation of causing life threatening injury has been attributed to co-accused namely- Anish. It is submitted that other co-accused persons have already been granted benefit of bail by this court as well as Co-ordinate Bench of this Court. It is contended that there are no criminal antecedents against the petitioners of similar nature and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. Counsel argues that petitioner- Kapil Kumar @ Deva is in custody since 19.07.2025 whereas petitioner- Abdul is in custody since 26.07.2025 and further custody of the petitioners would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioners and submits that two other cases have been registered against petitioner- Kapil Kumar @ Deva however, fairly concedes that cases registered are not of similar nature. 4. I have considered the contentions. 5. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the argument advanced by learned counsel for the petitioners, especially considering the material available on record in the form of charge-sheet, as also considering the fact that allegation of causing life threatening injury is against co-accused namely- Anish, so also the fact that [2025:RJ-JP:35401] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-10456/2025] other co-accused persons have already been granted benefit of bail by this Court as well as Co-ordinate Bench of this Court 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 proper to allow these bail applications. 6. These bail applications are accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioners (1) Kapil Kumar @ Deva S/o Shri Prahlad and (2) Abdul S/o Phool Mohammad, shall be released on bail provided each of them 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 they 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 observations made hereinabove are only for decision of these bail applications and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J CHARU SONI /111-112