Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2025 DAILYLAW 8351 (RAJ)

MOHIT KUMAR S/O LT. VIJAY KUMAR v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CRLMB/2771/2025 · 2025-03-17

Anil Kumar Upman

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2025:RJ-JP:11765] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 2771/2025 Mohit Kumar S/o Lt. Vijay Kumar, R/o House No. 26/403, Balka Basti Gokulpura Lohamandi Agara Presently At 25/208A Naya Bas Lohamandi, P.s. Lohamandi Agara (U.p.) (At Present Confined In District Jail Kota). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Amit Dadhich For Respondent(s) : Ms. Arti Sharma, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 17/03/2025 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.394/2024 registered at Police Station Kunhadi, District Kota City (Raj.) for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4) & 316(2) of BNS. Investigation is being conducted for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 316(2) & 61(2) of BNS. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel submits that alleged offences are triable by Magistrate. Petitioner is in custody since 08.01.2025 & there are no criminal antecedents against him. Trial of the case will take considerable time & further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. [2025:RJ-JP:11765] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-2771/2025] 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner. 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, as also considering the material available on record; alleged offences are triable by magistrate; trial will take time; absence of criminal antecedents as well as looking to the custody period, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it fit and proper to allow this bail application. 6. This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner Mohit Kumar S/o Lt. Vijay Kumar shall be released on bail provided he 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 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. It is made clear that the accused-petitioner shall not involve in any other offence(s) during currency of the bail and he shall mark his presence once in three months in the concerned police station, till trial is concluded. 8. Concerned SHO is directed to maintain a register recording the attendance of the petitioner, as directed above. In case the petitioner fails to mark his presence in the concerned police [2025:RJ-JP:11765] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-2771/2025] station, as directed above, the concerned SHO is directed to immediately report the matter to the concerned Court in this regard. 9. If any breach 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 him by this Court. 10. The observation 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 /169