Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2025 DAILYLAW 3943 (RAJ)

JAMSHED S/O SATTAR v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CRLMB/875/2025 · 2025-03-26

Anil Kumar Upman

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2025:RJ-JP:13781] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 875/2025 Jamshed S/o Sattar, Aged About 53 Years, R/o Sablana, Police Station Kaman, District Deeg (Raj.). (At Present Accused Petitioner Confined In Sub Jail Deeg) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Anupam Sharma For Respondent(s) For Complainant(s) : : Mr. Shriram Dhakad, PP Mr. Mohd. Shakir Khan HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 26/03/2025 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.451/2024 registered at Police Station Kaman, District Deeg (Raj.) for the offences punishable under Sections 189(2), 115(2), 126(2), 332(c), 303(2) & 74 of BNS. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel submits that there is no specific allegation against the petitioner to cause injury to the injured persons. Counsel submits that there is omnibus allegations against the petitioner in the FIR. Petitioner is in custody since 02.01.2025 and trial of the case will take considerable time. Further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor assisted by learned counsel for the [2025:RJ-JP:13781] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-875/2025] complainant vehemently opposes the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner. They submits that petitioner is duly named in the FIR. 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, as also the material available on record in the form of case diary; nature of allegation; period of custody, 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- Jamshed S/o Sattar 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. The observations made herein above are 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 /101