SANJEEV PAL S/O MUNIM PAL, RAMAVTAR YOGI v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN
CRLMB/14513/2024 · 2025-07-15
Vinod Kumar Bharwani
Transfer Petitionbody2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 33263 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 33263 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2025:RJ-JP:26330] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 3rd Bail Application No. 14513/2024 Sanjeev Pal S/o Munim Pal, Ramavtar Yogi, Aged About 27 Years, Resident Of Village Panoyda, Post Bilgram, Police Station Hardoi, Uttar Pradesh Presently Residing At Majdoor Mahalaxmi Fiber Industries, Plot No. 3 Surya Nagar, 10 Hasanpura, Near Kachra Depot, Police Station Daulatpura, Jaipur (Presently Confined At District Jail Jaipur) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Prakash Chand Thakuriya with Ms. Pooja Badaya For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vivek Sharma, P.P.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI
Order 15/07/2025 The instant 3rd bail application has been filed under Section 483 B.N.S.S. on behalf of accused-petitioner in the matter arising out of F.I.R. No. 145/2022 registered at Police Station Daulatpura, District Jaipur City (West) for the offence(s) punishable under Section(s) 302 I.P.C.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case, he has nothing to do with the alleged offence and he is behind the bars since 14.08.2022. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the prosecution had initially listed a total of 20 witnesses in support of its case; however, only 6 of them were ultimately examined during the course of the trial. It is further contended that there are material contradictions in the statements of the witnesses who were examined. Moreover, P.W.-5, namely Akhilesh Kumar, has turned hostile and failed to support the
[2025:RJ-JP:26330] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-14513/2024] prosecution’s case. It is also pointed out that there is no eyewitness to the alleged incident, which significantly weakens the case of the prosecution. Learned counsel further submits that trial of the case is likely to take a long time to conclude, till then, his further incarceration would not serve any fruitful purpose. The petitioner is ready & willing to furnish his bail bonds. Therefore, the 3rd bail application deserves to be allowed. Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the
submissions made herein-above. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. Considering the petitioner has been in custody since 14.08.2022, that only 6 out of 20 prosecution witnesses have been examined, that P.W.-5, Akhilesh Kumar, has turned hostile, and that there is no eyewitness to the alleged incident, this Court is of the view that continued detention of the present petitioner is not warranted. Accordingly, the 3rd bail application is allowed. Accused-petitioner namely Sanjeev Pal S/o Munim Pal, shall be released on bail, if he is not required in any other case, provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Fifty Thousand) together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Twenty-five Thousand) each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court with the stipulation that he shall appear before that Court and any other court to which the matter is transferred, on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when he is called upon to do so.
(VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI),J SAHIL SONI /6