Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2025 DAILYLAW 3969 (RAJ)

ALI KHAN @ ALLI S/O ISMAIL v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CRLMB/865/2025 · 2025-01-20

Anil Kumar Upman

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2025:RJ-JP:2678] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 865/2025 Ali Khan @ Alli S/o Ismail, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Solpur Patti Sikri, Police Station Sikri District Deeg (Rajasthan). (At Present Confined In Sub Jail Deeg). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ravindra Kumar For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 20/01/2025 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.210/2024 registered at Police Station Sikri, District Deeg (Raj.) for the offence punishable under Sections 323, 341, 452 & 307 of IPC. Later on, police filed the charge-sheet in this matter for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 341, 307, 324, 326 & 459 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 submits that during the course of trial, injured of this case has been examined wherein he has been declared hostile by the prosecution as he has not supported the prosecution case. It is submitted that no allegation has been levelled by the victim in her examination-in-chief against the petitioner. Petitioner is in custody since 08.05.2024 & there are no criminal antecedents against him. Charge-sheet has been filed and trial of the case will [2025:RJ-JP:2678] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-865/2025] take considerable time. Further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner, however he fairly concedes that injured has been declared hostile by the prosecution as he has not supported the prosecution case. 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 both the parties, especially the fact that injured has been declared hostile; absence of criminal antecedents as well as looking to the custody period, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it proper to allow the bail application. The observations 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. 6. This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner - Ali Khan @ Alli S/o Ismail, 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. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J GAUTAM JAIN /333