HARIRAM S/O SHRI RAMESHWAR LAL v. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN
CRLMB/14578/2025 · 2025-11-11
Sameer Jain
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 38563 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 38563 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2025:RJ-JP:45179] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 14578/2025 Hariram S/o Shri Rameshwar Lal, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Lauhar Colony, Chamdaghar, Police Station Gandhi Nagar, District Ajmer. (At Present Accused Petitioner Confined In Sub Jail Beawar). ----Applicant Versus The State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Applicant(s) : Mr. Hemant Gajraj with Mr. Satvir Singh Rawat For Respondent(s) : Ms. Arti Sharma, PP with Mr. Rhishi Raj Singh Rathore, PP HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN
Order 11/11/2025
1. The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 BNSS on behalf of accused-applicant. The accused-applicant was arrested in connection with FIR No.541/2021 registered at Police Station Beawar Sadar, District Ajmer for the offence(s) under Section 392 of IPC.
2.
Learned counsel for the accused-applicant submits that the matter pertains to bail jump. It is submitted that the applicant is a truck driver and for earning livelihood, he went out of State and could not mark presence before the learned Trial Court.
3. It is further submitted that it is an admitted fact that the applicant has priorly jumped the bail, by not marking presence before the learned Trial Court however, in this regard, for
consideration of the present matter, ratios opined in SBCRLMB No. 2371/2020 titled as Kuldeep Singh Vs. State of Raj. and SBCRLMB No. 8977/2022 titled as Husain Khan & Anr. Vs. State of Raj., ought to be considered. It is assured that the applicant shall not make an attempt to jump the bail again.
[2025:RJ-JP:45179] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-14578/2025]
3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application. It is submitted that there are all apprehensions that applicant will run away again and strict directions be passed, if bail is allowed.
4. Considering the arguments advanced by the counsel for the parties, considering that it is assured that the applicant shall now onward regularly appear before the learned Trial Court on each and every date of hearing, as fixed and directed by the Court concerned, and not jump the bail again; that the applicant is willing and ready to abide with the conditions so imposed, and taking note of the overall facts and circumstances, and relying upon the ratio encapsulated in SBCRLMB No. 2371/2020 (Supra) and SBCRLMB No. 8977/2022 (Supra), but without commenting on merits/demerits of the case, this court is inclined to allow the bail application of the accused-applicant and enlarge him on bail. Howsoever, it is directed that it be ensured that the applicant shall not jump the bail again.
5. Accordingly, the bail application under Section 483 BNSS is allowed and it is ordered that accused-applicant Hariram S/o Shri Rameshwar Lal shall be enlarged on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond of Rs.50,000/-, additionally deposit a cost of Rs. 5,000/- in favour of Rajasthan Police Benevolent Fund; and two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each, to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court with the stipulation to appear before that Court on all dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.
(SAMEER JAIN),J CHANDAN /206