NAVEEN @ BABA S/O LATE SHRI ROHTASH v. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN
CRLMB/2068/2025 · 2025-03-12
Anil Kumar Upman
Transfer Petitionbody2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 6507 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 6507 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2025:RJ-JP:11606] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 981/2025 Ravi S/o Shri Mohan, Aged About 19 Years, R/o Shiv Colony, Mannaka Road, Alwar, Police Station Vaishali Nagar, District Alwar Rajasthan. (At Present Accused Petitioner Is Confined In District Jail Bharatpur). ----Accused-Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent Connected With S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 2068/2025 Naveen @ Baba S/o Late Shri Rohtash, Aged About 19 Years, R/o Machadi, Police Station- Rajgarh, District- Alwar (Rajasthan), At Present -Near Kalpatru Godown, MIA Alwar, Police Station MIA, District- Alwar. (Accused Is Presently In Central Jail Bharatpur.) ----Accused-Petitioner Versus The State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Jamasi, Adv., and Mr. Vijay Choudhary, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Ms. Arti Sharma, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN
Order 12/03/2025
1. These instant bail applications have been filed under Section 483 of BNSS on behalf of the petitioners, who have been arrested in connection with FIR No.802/2024 registered at Police Station Kumher, District Deeg (Raj.) for the offences punishable under Sections 331(4) and 305(a) of BNS, 2023.
[2025:RJ-JP:11606] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-981/2025]
2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that the accused-petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case.
Learned counsel submit that alleged offences are triable by Magistrate. They further submit that trial of the case will take considerable time in its conclusion. They contend that the petitioners are in custody since their date of arrest and further custody of the petitioners would not serve any fruitful purpose.
3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by
learned counsel for the petitioners and submits that three other cases have been registered against petitioner-Ravi and two other cases have been registered against petitioner- Naveen @ Baba.
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 petitioners, especially the fact that alleged offences are triable by Magistrate; trial will take time in its conclusion and looking to the custody period, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it proper to allow these bail applications.
6. These bail applications are accordingly allowed and it is
directed that accused-petitioners - Ravi S/o Shri Mohan and Naveen @ Baba S/o Late Shri Rohtash shall be released on bail provided each of them furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court with the stipulation that they shall appear before that Court and any Court
[2025:RJ-JP:11606] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-981/2025] to which the matter is transferred, on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.
7. It is made clear that the accused-petitioners shall not involve in any other offence(s) during currency of the bail and they shall mark their presence in first week of every month in the concerned police station, till trial is concluded.
8. Concerned SHO is directed to maintain a register recording the attendance of the petitioners, as directed above. In case the petitioners fail to mark their presence in the concerned police station, as directed above, the concerned SHO is directed to immediately report the matter to the concerned Court in this regard.
9. If breach of any of these conditions is reported or come to the notice of the Court, the same shall alone be a reason for the trial Court to cancel the bail granted to them by this Court.
(ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J MADAN/244-45