Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2025 DAILYLAW 41704 (RAJ)

SOHEL @ BHALLA S/O RAFIK KHAN v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CRLMB/776/2025 · 2025-01-31

Ganesh Ram Meena

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2025:RJ-JP:4485] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 2nd Bail Application No. 776/2025 Sohel @ Bhalla S/o Rafik Khan, Aged About 23 Years, R/o Topchi Pada Mohalla, Manoharpura, Jaipur Rural Rajasthan, At Present R/o As A Tenat Sameena Dholak Wali Ka Makan, J.d.a. Colony, Meena Paladi, Police Station Khoh Nagoriyan, Jaipur (At Present Confined In Centre Jail, Jaipur). ----Petitioner Versus State of Rajasthan, through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vinod Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vijay Singh Yadav, Public Prosecutor HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA Order 31/01/2025 1. This 2nd bail application has been filed under Section 483 BNSS, 2023 on behalf of accused-petitioner in connection with FIR No.139/2023 registered at Police Station Vaishali Nagar, Jaipur (West) for the offence under Section 382 IPC. 2. First bail application of the petitioner bearing S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.14645/2024 was dismissed as withdrawn by this Court vide order dated 06.12.2024 with liberty to file bail application before the learned trial Court under the provisions of Section 480(6) of the BNSS, 2023. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the accused- petitioner is in custody since 13.06.2023 and till date even the [2025:RJ-JP:4485] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-776/2025] charges were not framed in the matter because of one accused was absconding. 4. Having regard to the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner and more particularly the fact that the petitioner is in custody since 13.06.2023 and till date even the charges has not been framed in the matter which is clear violation of the right of speedy trial available to the petitioner under Article 21 of the Constitution of India and thus, this Court looking to the fact that there is a delay in trial which is not attributed to the accused- petitioner, deems just and proper to enlarge the accused- petitioner on bail. 5. Accordingly, this 2nd bail application under Section 483 of the BNSS is allowed and it is ordered that the accused-petitioner named above in connection with the aforesaid FIR shall be enlarged on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/-, together with two sureties of Rs.50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for his appearance before the Court concerned on all the dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so. (GANESH RAM MEENA),J Ashish Kumar /416