SURAJMAL MALAV S/O SHRI PHOOLCHAND v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN
CRLMB/15651/2025 · 2025-11-28
Anil Kumar Upman
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 46516 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 46516 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2025:RJ-JP:48449] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 15651/2025 Surajmal Malav S/o Shri Phoolchand, Aged About 45 Years, R/o Kheri Tehsil Chipabadoh District Baran Rajasthan At Present Resident Of Iklera Road Front Of Hp Petrol Pump Chipabadoh, Tehsil Chipabadoh, District Baran, Rajasthan. (Presently Confined In District Jail Baran). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ashvin Garg For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 28/11/2025
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.242/2025 registered at Police Station C.P.S. Jaipur, ACB District for offences punishable under Sections 7 & 7A of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (amended 2018) and Section 61(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (in short, ‘BNS’), 2023. After completion of investigation, police filed charge-sheet against the petitioner for offences punishable under Sections 7 & 12 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (amended 2018). 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. It is contended that co-accused, who was found in possession of bribe amount, has already been granted benefit of bail by Co-ordinate Bench of
[2025:RJ-JP:48449] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-15651/2025] this Court. Learned counsel contends that there are no criminal antecedents against the petitioner of similar nature however, four other cases have been registered against the petitioner wherein he is on bail. It is contended that trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. Counsel submits that petitioner is in custody since 16.09.2025 and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposes the prayer for bail made by learned counsel for the petitioner. 4. Heard. Perused the material available on record. 5. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances; considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner, especially considering the fact that after investigation, police has submitted the charge-sheet, as also the fact that co- accused has been granted benefit of bail by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion as well as looking to the custody period, but without expressing any opinion on merits/demerits of this case, I deem it proper to allow the bail application. 6.
6. This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner - Surajmal Malav S/o Shri Phoolchand, shall be released on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty 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
[2025:RJ-JP:48449] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-15651/2025] 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 CHARU SONI /107