Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2025 DAILYLAW 28771 (RAJ)

MUKESH KUMAR S/O GORELAL v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CRLMB/10962/2025 · 2025-08-29

Anil Kumar Upman

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2025:RJ-JP:34755] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 10962/2025 Mukesh Kumar S/o Gorelal, Aged About 55 Years, R/o Village Nidhara Police Station Badi Sadar Dholpur Raj (Accused Petitioner In Judicial Custody In District Jail Dholpur). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sumit Kumar Jain For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 29/08/2025 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.194/2024 registered at Police Station Badi Sadar, District Dholpur for the offences punishable under Sections 3 and 7 of Essential Commodities Act, 1955. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. It is submitted that alleged offences are triable by Magistrate. It is submitted that two criminal antecedents have been shown in the impugned order in which he has been acquitted. It is contended that presently, no other case is pending against the petitioner. It is contended that trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. It is argued that petitioner is in custody since 06.08.2025 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. [2025:RJ-JP:34755] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-10962/2025] 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, especially considering the fact that alleged offences are triable by Magistrate, as also the fact that presently, petitioner has no criminal antecedents 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 this bail application. 6. 6. This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner - Mukesh Kumar S/o Gorelal, shall be released on bail provided, he shall furnish 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 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 /153