RAJENDRA SINGH S/O LATE MANGAL v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN
CRLMB/538/2025 · 2025-03-06
Anil Kumar Upman
Transfer Petitionbody2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 3243 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 3243 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2025:RJ-JP:10260] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 538/2025
1. Rajendra Singh S/o Late Mangal, Aged About 41 Years, R/o Village Vijay Nagar Colony, Heeradas, P.s. Atalband, District Bharatpur. (At Present Confined In Central Jail Bharatpur).
2. Smt. Kinna W/o Late Mangal, Aged About 65 Years, R/o Village Vijay Nagar Colony, Heeradas, P.s. Atalband, District Bharatpur. (At Present Confined In Central Jail Bharatpur). ----Petitioners Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. J.K. Moolchandani For Respondent(s) For Complainant(s) : : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP Mr. Vinod Kumar Sharma HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN
Order 06/03/2025
1. The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS, on behalf of the petitioners, who have been arrested in connection with FIR No.476/2024 registered at Police Station Sewar, District Bharatpur (Raj.) for the offences punishable under Sections 420 & 406 of IPC. Later on, police filed charge-sheet in this matter for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 406 & 120B of IPC.
2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that the accused-petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. It is submitted that alleged offences are triable by Magistrate. It is
[2025:RJ-JP:10260] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-538/2025] submitted that entire offences are based on documents which are in power and possession of the Investigating Agency. Charge- sheet has been filed and trial of the case will take considerable time in its conclusion. Petitioners are in custody since their date of arrest and further custody of the petitioners would not serve any fruitful purpose.
3. Learned Public Prosecutor assisted by learned counsel for complainant vehemently opposes the submissions made by
learned counsel for the petitioners. It is submitted that same property has been sold thrice by the petitioners and one other FIR has also been registered against them.
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 both the parties, so also the fact that alleged offences are triable by Magistrate; charge-sheet has been filed and trial will take 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 the bail application.
6. This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioners – 1) Rajendra Singh S/o Late Mangal and 2) Smt. Kinna W/o Late Mangal, shall be 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
[2025:RJ-JP:10260] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-538/2025] to which the matter is transferred, on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.
7. It is made clear that the accused-petitioners shall not involve in any other offence(s) during currency of the bail and they shall mark their presence in first week of every month in the concerned police station, till trial is concluded.
8. Concerned SHO is directed to maintain a register recording the attendance of the petitioners, as directed above. In case the petitioners fail to mark their presence in the concerned police station, as directed above, the concerned SHO is directed to immediately report the matter to the concerned Court in this regard.
9. If breach of any 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 them by this Court.
10. The observation made herein above is 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 GAUTAM JAIN /103