Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2025 DAILYLAW 32286 (RAJ)

DEVENDRA @ DOCTOR S/O HARIMOHAN GURJAR v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CRLMB/13298/2024 · 2025-01-28

Anil Kumar Upman

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2025:RJ-JP:3882] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 13298/2024 Devendra @ Doctor S/o Harimohan Gurjar, Aged About 23 Years, R/o Jaisingh Pura, Police Thana Khandar, District Sawai Madhopur, Rajasthan. (Presently Accused Petitioner Is Confined In Central Jail Jaipur) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent Connected With S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 15487/2024 Lokesh S/o Ramesh Gurjar, Aged About 24 Years, R/o Village Badhpur, Police Station Khandar, District Sawai Madhopur, Rajasthan. (At Present Confined In Central Jail, Jaipur). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Deepak Chauhan Mr. Shribhan Gurjar For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP Mr. M.S. Shekhawat, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 28/01/2025 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.343/2024 registered at Police Station Shyam Nagar, District Jaipur City(South) (Rajasthan) for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 109(1) & 3(5) of BNS and Section 4/25 of Arms Act. Later on, police filed [2025:RJ-JP:3882] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-13298/2024] charge-sheet in this matter for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 109(1), 118(2), 238(a) & 61(2)(a) of BNS and Section 4/25 of Arms Act. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel submits that according to the FIR and statement of the victim, allegation of causing knife injuries is against the co-accused Hariom. Counsel submits that petitioners are not named in the FIR. Petitioners Devendra @ Doctor and Lokesh are in custody since 30.09.2024 & 10.11.2024 respectively and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. Further custody of the petitioners would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by counsel for the petitioners. He submits that four other cases have been registered against the petitioner Devendra @ Doctor. 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 petitioners, as also the fact that allegation of causing knife injuries is against the co-accused Hariom; charge-sheet has been filed in this matter and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion; period of custody of the petitioners, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it fit and proper to allow these bail applications. 6. These bail applications are accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioners Devendra @ Doctor S/o Harimohan Gurjar & Lokesh S/o Ramesh Gurjar shall be [2025:RJ-JP:3882] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-13298/2024] 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 observation made hereinabove is only for decision of the instant bail applications and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner. 8. Considering the pendency of four other cases against the petitioner Devendra @ Doctor, it is made clear that the accused- petitioner Devendra @ Doctor shall not involve in any other offence(s) during currency of the bail and he shall mark his presence in first week of every month in the concerned police station. 9. Concerned SHO is directed to maintain a register recording the attendance of the petitioner Devendra @ Doctor. In case the petitioner fails to mark his presence in the concerned police station, the concerned SHO is directed to immediately report the matter to the concerned Court in this regard. 10. If any breach of these conditions is reported or come to the notice of the Court, the same shall alone be a reason for the trial court to cancel the bail granted to him by this Court. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J LALIT MOHAN /81-82