Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2025 DAILYLAW 34470 (RAJ)

SHEELA @ SUSHILA DEVI W/O SHRI SUMER SINGH v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CRLMB/15647/2024 · 2025-01-03

Praveer Bhatnagar

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2025:RJ-JP:418] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 15647/2024 1. Sheela @ Sushila Devi W/o Shri Sumer Singh, Aged About 42 Years, R/o Parsa Ka Bas Tan Bhudanpura, Police Station Surajgarh, District Jhunjhunu (Raj.). (At Present Confined In Districtjail, Jhunjhunu). 2. Manju Devi W/o Shri Hawasingh, Aged About 45 Years, R/o Parsa Ka Bas Tan Bhudanpura, Police Station Surajgarh, District Jhunjhunu (Raj.). (At Present Confined In Districtjail, Jhunjhunu). ----Petitioners Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Hem Singh For Respondent(s) : Mr. S.R. Dhakar, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR Order 03/01/2025 1. The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 B.N.S.S. on behalf of the accused-petitioners. The accused- petitioners have been arrested in connection with FIR No.344/2024 registered at Police Station Surajgarh, District Jhunjhunu for the offence(s) under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 121(1), 132, 109(1) of B.N.S. and Section 3 of PDPP Act. 2. Learned counsel for the accused-petitioners submits that the accused-petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that the allegations levelled against the accused- petitioners are per se false. It is contended that the accused- petitioners has also lodged a cross FIR against the police officials. It is also contended that the accused Sumer, Sunil and Sandeep sustained injuries. It is also contended that the allegations levelled against the accused-petitioners are not specific rather omnibus in [2025:RJ-JP:418] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-15647/2024] nature. The accused-petitioners are in judicial custody since one month and trial/investigation of the case may take considerable time, therefore, the bail applications of the accused-petitioners may be allowed. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposes the bail applications and has submitted the factual report, the same is taken on record. 4. Heard and perused the material available on record. 5. Considering the arguments advanced by the counsel for the parties and looking to the fact that the accused-petitioners remained in custody since long and trial of the case may take considerable time, without expressing anything on the merits of the case, I deem it just and proper to enlarge the accused- petitioners on bail. 6. Accordingly, the bail application under Section 483 B.N.S.S. is allowed and it is ordered that the accused-petitioners namely: (1) Sheela @ Sushila Devi W/o Shri Sumer Singh & (2) Manju Devi W/o Shri Hawasingh, in connection with FIR No. 344/2024 registered at Police Station Surajgarh, District Jhunjhunu, shall be enlarged on bail provided each of them furnish a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for their appearance before the court concerned on all the dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so. (PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J DEEPA RANI -66