SANDEEP DIWEDI S/O GOVIND DUTT v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN
CRLMB/16088/2025 · 2025-12-11
Anil Kumar Upman
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 47843 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 47843 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2025:RJ-JP:50328] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 16088/2025 Sandeep Diwedi S/o Govind Dutt, Aged About 35 Years, R/o House No. 17, Choudhary Colony, Road No. 14, V.k.i. Jaipur, At Present Junior Engineer, Office Of Junior Engineer, Ajmer Vidyut Vitaran Nigam Limited, Bassi, Tehsil Shrimadhopur, District Sikar. (Accused Petitioner Presently Confined In District Jail Sikar). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Ripu Daman Singh For Respondent(s) : Mr. M.S. Shekhawat, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 11/12/2025
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.300/2025 registered at Police Station C.P.S. Jaipur, ACB District for the offence punishable under Section 7 of Prevention of Corruption (Amendment) Act, 1988. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. It is submitted that petitioner never demanded money as bribe from the complainant. Counsel submits that trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. 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 the learned counsel for the petitioner. [2025:RJ-JP:50328] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-16088/2025]
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; so also considering the fact that trial will take considerable time in its conclusion 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. 6. This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner – Sandeep Diwedi S/o Govind Dutt 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 and as and when called upon to do so. 7.
7. The observations made herein above is only for decision of the instant bail application and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J GAUTAM JAIN /15