SONU KUMAR MEENA S/O SHRI SHISHRAM v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN
CRLMB/15911/2024 · 2025-01-15
Anil Kumar Upman
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 34859 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 34859 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2025:RJ-JP:1935] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 15911/2024 Sonu Kumar Meena S/o Shri Shishram, Aged About 19 Years, R/o Ghasipura, Police Station Patan (Raj.). (At Present Confined In Sub Jail Neem Ka Thana). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Navankur Dubey on behalf of Mr. Santosh Kumar Soni For Respondent(s) : Ms. Arti Sharma, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN
Order 15/01/2025
1. The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.266/2024 registered at Police Station Patan(Sikar), District Neem Ka Thana (Rajasthan) for the offences punishable under Sections 87 & 127(3) of BNS. During investigation, offences punishable under Sections 87 & 127(3) of BNS have been found proved against the petitioner.
2.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel submits that victim who is a married lady, left her matrimonial home on her own and went to the Gujarat. Counsel submits that according to the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 of BNSS
[2025:RJ-JP:1935] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-15911/2024] (Section 164 of Cr.PC), no allegation of commission of rape has been levelled against the petitioner by the victim. Counsel submits that there are no criminal antecedents of the petitioner. Counsel further submits that petitioner who is aged about 19 years is in custody since 29.11.2024 and trial will take considerable time. Further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose.
3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by 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 further considering the statement of victim recorded under Section 183 of BNSS wherein no allegation with regard to the rape is appearing; absence of criminal antecedents of the petitioner; petitioner is in custody since 29.11.2024, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it fit and proper to allow this bail application.
6. This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner Sonu Kumar Meena S/o Shri Shishram 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.
[2025:RJ-JP:1935] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-15911/2024]
7. Any observation made hereinabove 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 LALIT MOHAN /281