Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2025 DAILYLAW 29631 (RAJ)

ARBAJ S/O HASAM v. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CRLMB/11439/2025 · 2025-09-10

Praveer Bhatnagar

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2025:RJ-JP:36506] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 11439/2025 Arbaj S/o Hasam, Aged About 19 Years, R/o Bhilmaka, Police Station Deeg, District Deeg. (At Present Confined In Sub Jail Deeg). ----Petitioner Versus The State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Surendra Singh, Adv. Mr. Anoop Kumar, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Manvendra Singh, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR Order 10/09/2025 1. The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. on behalf of accused-petitioner. The accused-petitioner has been arrested in connection with FIR No.225/2024, registered at Police Station Deeg, District Deeg, for the offence(s) under Sections 111(6), 318(2), 336(2), 338, 340(2), 61(2)(a) of BNS and Section 66 of the I.T. Act. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submit that the accused- petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. It is contended that the accused-petitioner is in custody since long, the matter is exclusively triable by Magistrate and the trial of the case may take considerable time, therefore, the bail application of the accused- petitioner may be allowed. [2025:RJ-JP:36506] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-11439/2025] 3. Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the grant of bail application and contended that accused-petitioner is a habitual offender and against him criminal case is pending, therefore, the bail application of the accused-petitioner may be dismissed. 4. Heard and perused the material available on the record. 5. Considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner and looking to the fact that the matter is exclusively triable by Magistrate, the accused-petitioner is in custody since long and the trial of the case may take considerable time, without commenting anything on the merits of the case, I deem it just and proper to enlarge the accused-petitioner on bail. 6. Accordingly, the bail application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. is allowed and it is ordered that the accused petitioner- Arbaj S/o Hasam, in connection with FIR No.225/2024, registered at Police Station Deeg, District Deeg, shall be enlarged on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for his appearance before the Court concerned on all the dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so. 7. The accused-petitioner is also directed to mark his presence on 25th of every month before the concerned Police Station till conclusion of the trial. The SHO of the concerned Police Station is directed to maintain a regular register marking the presence of the accused petitioner and shall send the presence report of the accused petitioner on the same day to the concerned trial Court every month without any delay. In case of any breach to the [2025:RJ-JP:36506] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-11439/2025] above condition, the learned Public Prosecutor shall be free to move the application against the petitioner for cancellation of the bail before the concerned Court. (PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J Ashwani Kr Srivastava /-35