JODHRAJ S/O LATE SHRI SHYONARAYAN v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN
CRLMB/416/2025 · 2025-01-20
Anil Kumar Upman
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 2967 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 2967 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2025:RJ-JP:2651] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 416/2025 Jodhraj S/o Late Shri Shyonarayan, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Banjari Bawdi, Police Station Nainwa, District Bundi (Rajasthan). (At Present Confined In District Jail Bundi). ----Accused-Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Praveen Sharma, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakad, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN
Order 20/01/2025
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.156/2024 registered at Police Station Nainwa, District Bundi for the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC. Later on, Police has filed charge-sheet in this matter for the offence punishable under Section 306 of IPC.
2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case.
Learned counsel submits that marriage of the petitioner was solemnized with the deceased 12-13 years ago and two children, who are presently 8 years and 6 years respectively, were born out of their wedlock. He further submits that for some unknown reasons, deceased consumed poison and immediately thereafter she was taken to the hospital by the petitioner, which is evident
[2025:RJ-JP:2651] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-416/2025] from the statement of both the children. Police has filed charge-sheet for the offence punishable under Section 306 of IPC, however, FIR was lodged for the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC, as during investigation, same was not found proved. He contends that trial of the case will take considerable time. He further contends that the petitioner is in custody since 19.12.2024 and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose.
3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by the learned 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, especially looking to the statements of both the children recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. (Section 183 of BNSS, 2023); charge-sheet has been filed; trial will take time in its conclusion as well as looking to the period of custody, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it proper to allow the bail application.
6. This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner - Jodhraj S/o Late Shri Shyonarayan shall be released on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) together
[2025:RJ-JP:2651] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-416/2025] 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.
(ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J MADAN/294