Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2025 DAILYLAW 44798 (RAJ)

VIJAY S/O BACHHU SINGH v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CRLMB/14533/2025 · 2025-11-11

Anoop Kumar Dhand

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 2nd Bail Application No. 14533/2025 Vijay S/o Bachhu Singh, R/o Thakur Pada Badi, Police Station Badi District Dholpur. At Present Confined In Judicial Custody At District Jail Dholpur. ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sachin Kumar Mittal For Respondent(s) : Mr. Amit Gupta-PP JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 11/11/2025 1. This 2nd bail application under Section 483 B.N.S.S. has been filed by the petitioner in connection with the FIR No. 302/2025 registered at Police Station Bari, District Dholpur wherein he was charged for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 189(2), 109(1), 303(2) and 352 BNS. 2. The first bail application of the petitioner was rejected by this Court vide order dated 14.10.2025 granting liberty to the petitioner to renew his prayer for bail after completion of investigation and filing of charge-sheet. 3. Counsel for the petitioner submits that now the investigation has been completed and charge-sheet has been filed against the petitioner under Section 110 of BNS. Counsel submits that injured Pankaj has not sustained any injury on the vital parts of his body, (2 of 3) [CRLMB-14533/2025] it is only his hands and legs that were found to be fractured which are non-vital parts of his body. 4 Per contra, leraned Public Prosecutor has opposed the arguments raised by counsel for the petitioner and submitted that the petitioner is a habitual offender and he is in the habit of committing and repeating the same offence again and again. Counsel submits that fourteen cases have been registered against the petitioner, hence under these circumstances, the petitioner is not entitled to get the benefit of bail. 5. Heard and considered the submissions made at Bar and perused the material available on record. 6. Considering the arguments raised by counsel for the petitioner and looking to the fact that the injured has not sustained any injury on any vital parts of his body and the two injuries sustained on his hands and legs have been found to be grievous in nature as Tibia Fibula Bone, has been fractured and also looking to the fact that after investigation, charge sheet has been submitted and trial will take its own time to conclude, without expressing any opinion on the merits and demerits of the case, this Court deems it just and appropriate to grant indulgence of bail to the petitioner under Section 483 BNSS. 7. Accordingly, the second bail application under Section 483 B.N.S.S. is allowed and it is ordered that the accused-petitioner- Vijay S/o Bachhu Singh arrested in connection with aforementioned FIR, may be released on bail; provided he furnishes a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two surety bonds of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court with (3 of 3) [CRLMB-14533/2025] the stipulation to appear before that Court on all dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so. 8. In case, the petitioner is found involved in committing and repeating the same offence again in the future, the Learned Public Prosecutor and Investigating Officer would be at liberty to move an application for cancellation of bail before the Jurisdictional Court. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Ashu/2