Nehru Meena S/O Shri Lohade Ram vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jp:399) on 3 January, 2025

0
21

Rajasthan High Court – Jaipur

Nehru Meena S/O Shri Lohade Ram vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jp:399) on 3 January, 2025

Author: Anil Kumar Upman

Bench: Anil Kumar Upman

[2025:RJ-JP:399]

        HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                    BENCH AT JAIPUR

     S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 11815/2024

 Nehru Meena S/o Shri Lohade Ram, Aged About 27 Years, R/o
 Meena Baroda, Police Station Wazirpur, District Gangapur City
 (Rajasthan) (Presently Confined In District Jail, Gangapur City).
                                                                         ----Petitioner
                                      Versus
 State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
                                                                     ----Respondent
For Petitioner(s)            :    Mr. Rajneesh Gupta
For Respondent(s)            :    Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP
                                  Mr. Ritesh Kumawat



           HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN

                                       Order

03/01/2025

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.497/2023 registered at Police Station

Khonagoriyan, District Jaipur City (East) for the offences

punishable under Sections 147, 323, 341, 307 & 427 of IPC.

Investigation is being conducted for the offences punishable under

Sections 147, 323, 341, 307 & 427 of IPC & Section 3/25(6) of

Arms Act.

2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the

accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case.

Learned counsel submits that although, there is allegation against

the petitioner of causing firearm injury but medical report of the

injured shows that he has not sustained any firearm injury. He

submits that alleged incident took place at the spur of moment on

(Downloaded on 01/02/2025 at 12:23:58 AM)
[2025:RJ-JP:399] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-11815/2024]

account petty issue. Now dispute has been resolved by the parties

amicably. It is submitted that other co-accused persons of this

case have already been granted benefit of bail by this court as

well as co-ordinate bench of this court. Petitioner is in custody

since his date of arrest. Further custody of the petitioner would

not serve any fruitful purpose.

3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by

learned counsel for the petitioner. He submits that petitioner is a

habitual as 22 other cases have been registered against him.

4. However, learned counsel appearing for injured/complainant

does not dispute the factum of compromise & he has no objection

if this bail application is allowed.

5. I have considered the contentions.

6. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances

of the case; considering the arguments advanced by learned

counsel for the petitioner, especially the fact that parties have

resolved their dispute amicably and as per medical report of

injured, he has not sustained any firearm injury; charge-sheet has

been filed 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. The observations made

hereinabove is only for decision of the instant bail application and

would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner.

7. This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed

that accused-petitioner – Nehru Meena S/o Shri Lohade Ram,

shall be released on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in

the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) together

(Downloaded on 01/02/2025 at 12:23:58 AM)
[2025:RJ-JP:399] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-11815/2024]

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.

8. 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 on once in three months in the concerned

police station.

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.

(ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J

GAUTAM JAIN /54

(Downloaded on 01/02/2025 at 12:23:58 AM)

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)



Source link

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here