Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2025 DAILYLAW 41679 (RAJ)

ABHISHEK SINGH S/O SHRI RAMBHAJAN SINGH v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CRLMB/12242/2025 · 2025-09-26

Anil Kumar Upman

Transfer Petitionbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2025:RJ-JP:39738] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 12242/2025 Abhishek Singh S/o Shri Rambhajan Singh, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Plot No. 32-A, Deewan Nagar, Daulatpur Road, Benar P.S. Harmara, District Jaipur-West (Raj.) (At Present Confined In Central Jail Kota). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mahaveer Kalwa For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP with Mr. Gaurav Gupta, Asstt. G.A. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 26/09/2025 1. This bail application has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.72/2025 registered at Police Station Bhimganj Mandi, District Kota City (Rajasthan) for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468 & 471 of IPC. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel submits that alleged offences are triable by Magistrate. Counsel submits that there is allegation against the co-accused Ashok Singh Solanki that he obtained loan by furnishing forged PAN Card. Counsel submits that it is alleged that said PAN Card was prepared by the petitioner. Counsel submits that co-accused namely Ashok Singh Solanki and Mohammad Akram have already [2025:RJ-JP:39738] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-12242/2025] been granted benefit of bail by this Court. Counsel submits that there are no criminal antecedents against the petitioner. It is submitted that trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. Counsel submits that petitioner is in custody since his date of arrest and 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, as also the fact that alleged offences are triable by Magistrate; co-accused namely Ashok Singh Solanki and Mohammad Akram have already been granted benefit of bail by this Court; there are no criminal antecedents against the petitioner and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion as well as looking to the 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. 6. This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner- Abhishek Singh S/o Shri Rambhajan Singh 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 [2025:RJ-JP:39738] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-12242/2025] subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so. 7. The observations made hereinabove are only for decision of the bail application and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J LALIT MOHAN /66