Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2026 DAILYLAW 21052 (RAJ)

SANJAY PAHADIYA S/O SHREE AMAR SINGH v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CRLMB/17085/2025 · 2026-01-08

Ashok Kumar Jain

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2026:RJ-JP:690] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal 2nd Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 17085/2025 Sanjay Pahadiya S/o Shree Amar Singh, Aged About 40 Years, R/o F 2/425 Ground Floor, Sangam Vihar, Police Station Sangam Vihar, Delhi. At Present In Central Jail, Jaipur ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sikandar Ali Chopdar For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vijay Singh Yadav, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN Order 08/01/2026 1. The present bail application under Section 483 of BNSS is filed by the applicant-accused Sanjay Pahadiya S/o Shree Amar Singh seeking bail in respect of a criminal case registered as FIR No.79/2022 dated 10.03.2022 registered at P.S. Jawahar Nagar, District – Jaipur East, for the offence under Sections 457, 380 of IPC. 2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the matter and the investigation against him is complete and he is no more required in investigation. He further submits that there are no chance of fleeing of applicant accused from the jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court. He also submits that the applicant undertakes not to repeat offence and cooperate with investigation/trial, which will take time. [2026:RJ-JP:690] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-17085/2025] 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that first bail application of present petitioner was dismissed as withdrawn on 11.08.2025. He further submitted that present petitioner is in custody since 11.06.2025 and till date trial has not been concluded. He further submitted that if the trial has not been concluded within 60 days, then the petitioner is entitled for bail. He referred statement of witnesses recorded so far and submitted that none of the evidence is sufficient to draw a conclusion that present petitioner has committed the offence. He further submitted that even the recovery as effected by police is not sufficient to draw conclusion that present petitioner is involved in theft committed between 06.03.2022 to 09.03.2022 at the house of complainant. He further submitted that co-accused Mohd. Javed has been granted bail by a Co-ordinate Bench. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application and submitted that the allegations are grave and serious in nature. He has also filed a report received from concerned Police Station along with criminal antecedents of 66 cases registered against the petitioner out of which 4 were disposed. 5. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner-accused and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material placed on record by both the parties. 6. On the basis of report about house breaking and also theft committed in the house of complainant, FIR No. 79/2022 under Sections 457 and 380 IPC was registered on 10.03.2022 at P.S. Jawahar Nagar, Jaipur (East). Duirng [2026:RJ-JP:690] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-17085/2025] investigation, present petitioner was arrested after interception of vehicle at toll gate and on interrogation the petitioner was found involved in the incident. A charge-sheet has been filed against the petitioner and co-accused Javed. Till date, 8 witnesses were examined by the prosecution. 7. There are 66 criminal cases against the petitioner and same is sufficient is draw a conclusion that present petitioner is a habitual criminal indulged in criminal activities. 8. The facts and the material indicate that the alleged offence are of serious nature and role attributed to applicant is prima facie sufficient to consider complicity of applicant in the crime. Therefore, at this juncture, considering the evidence collected so far, this is not a fit case to enlarge the applicant accused on bail. 9. Considering the gravity of allegations and overall facts and circumstances of the case, it is appropriate to dismiss the bail application of the applicant accused at this stage. 10. Accordingly, the application for bail filed under Section 483 of BNSS preferred by Sanjay Pahadiya S/o Shree Amar Singh is hereby dismissed. (ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J PREETI VALECHA /13