MAHMOOD @ TAKLA S/O SHRI RAHMAT KHAN v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN
CRLMB/15430/2024 · 2025-02-28
Anil Kumar Upman
Transfer Petitionbody2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 34308 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 34308 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2025:RJ-JP:8990] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 15430/2024 Mahmood @ Takla S/o Shri Rahmat Khan, Aged About 56 Years, Resident Of Tikari, Police Station Punhana, District Nuh Mewat Hariyana. (Accused Petitioner Is Confined At District Jail Kotputali) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Manish Gupta Ms. Shweta Soni For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sudesh Kumar Sain, PP with Mr. Shubham Sain, AAAG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN
Order 28/02/2025
1. The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 BNSS on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.598/2007 registered at Police Station Kotputali, District Jaipur Rural for the offences punishable under Sections 224, 332, 353, 323 & 34 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 submit that petitioner has not committed any offence during the period of abscondence. It is submitted that alleged offence relates to year 2007. It is further submitted that petitioner has no criminal antecedents and he is in custody since
[2025:RJ-JP:8990] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-15430/2024]
23.10.2024. Further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. Trial of the case will take considerable time.
3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by the 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 and also considering the period of custody and absence of criminal antecedents, 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 Mahmood @ Takla S/o Shri Rahmat Khan, shall be released on bail provided he 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 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.
7. It is made clear that the accused-petitioner 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, till trial is concluded.
8. Concerned SHO is directed to maintain a register recording
[2025:RJ-JP:8990] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-15430/2024] the attendance of the petitioner, as directed above. In case the petitioner fails to mark his 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 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 CHARU SONI /131