Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2025 DAILYLAW 4845 (RAJ)

RAKESH S/O PUKHRAJ v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CRLMB/1297/2025 · 2025-01-23

Praveer Bhatnagar

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Misc. Third Bail (Interim) Application No. 1297/2025 Rakesh S/o Pukhraj, Aged About 21 Years, R/o Khedi Salwa Police Station Dangiyawas, District Jodhpur (Raj.) (At Present Accused Confined In District Jail, Kota) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Nirmal Kumar Sharma For Respondent(s) : Ms. Manju Dave, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR Order 23/01/2025 1. The matter comes upon an interim application filed by the accused-petitioner for seeking his release on interim bail, on the ground of his father demise on 12.01.2025. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the accused-petitioner that there is no criminal antecedents against the accused- petitioner. It is also contended that the father of the accused- petitioner died on 12.01.2025 and the learned trial Court vide order dated dismissed the bail application on the ground of recovery of commercial quantity of contraband articles from the possession of the accused-petitioner. It is also contended that the learned Court has also recorded that the father of the accused- petitioner died on 12.01.2025. It is also contended that the accused-petitioner seeks to perform last rite of his father, (2 of 2) [CRLMB-1297/2025] therefore, the interim bail application of the accused-petitioner may be allowed. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the interim bail application and submitted the verification report which shows that the father of the accused-petitioner died on 12.01.2025. 4. Considering the fact that huge commercial quantity of contraband articles were recovered from the possession of the accused-petitioner and last rite of his father has already been performed, therefore, I am not inclined to enlarge the accused- petitioner on interim bail. 5. Accordingly, this criminal misc. third (interim) bail application of the accused-petitioner is hereby, dismissed. (PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J DEEPA RANI -38