Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2025 DAILYLAW 30716 (RAJ)

AKSHAY GURJAR @ DURGALAL S/O SUKHA @ SUKHDEV v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CRLMB/11712/2024 · 2025-01-17

Anil Kumar Upman

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2025:RJ-JP:2370] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 11712/2024 Akshay Gurjar @ Durgalal S/o Sukha @ Sukhdev, R/o Akhtasa, Police Station Taleda, District Bundi (Rajasthan) (At Present Confined In Central Jail Kota). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Majhar Hussain For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 17/01/2025 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.189/2022 registered at Police Station Dadabadi, District Kota City (Raj.) for the offence punishable under Section 457 & 380 of IPC. Later on, police filed charge- sheet in the matter for the offence punishable under Section 457, 380, 419, 471 & 473 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 alleged offences are triable by the Magistrate. Petitioner is in custody since 10.08.2024. Further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by the counsel for the petitioner. He submits that petitioner is [2025:RJ-JP:2370] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-11712/2024] habitual offender and 23 other cases have been registered against him and in seven cases he has been convicted. Thus, bail should not be granted to him. 4. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties and also considering the criminal antecedents of the petitioner; as also the fact that in seven cases, petitioner has been convicted, I do not find it a fit case to allow this bail application. 5. Accordingly, this bail application stands dismissed. However, observations made herein are only decision of this bail application and would not have any impact on the trial of the case. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J LALIT MOHAN /77