[ad_1]
Rajasthan High Court – Jaipur
Chhitarmal @ Premsingh @ Premchand S/O … vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jp:20864) on 16 May, 2025
Author: Farjand Ali
Bench: Farjand Ali
[2025:RJ-JP:20864]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous II Bail Application No. 6188/2025
Chhitarmal @ Premsingh @ Premchand S/o Jagga @ Jagdish,
Aged About 69 Years, R/o Basda, Police Station Choth Ka
Barwada, District Sawaimadhopur Presently District Jail Tonk
(Raj.) (Accused/ Petitioner In District Jail Tonk)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sandeep Jain
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Omkar Singh, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI
(THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING)
Order
16/05/2025
1. The jurisdiction of this Court has been invoked by way of
filing an application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. at the instance
of accused-petitioner. The requisite details of the matter are
tabulated herein below:
S.No. Particulars of the Case 1. FIR Number 67/2019 2. Concerned Police Station Kotwali 3. District Bundi 4. Offences alleged in the FIR Under Sections 420, 406, 384, 506, 467, 468, 471 & 120- B of IPC 5. Offences added, if any -
6. Date of passing of impugned 22.04.2025
order
2. It is contended on behalf of the accused-petitioner that the
offences alleged are triable by a Court of magistrate. No case
(Downloaded on 19/05/2025 at 09:59:28 PM)
[2025:RJ-JP:20864] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-6188/2025]
for the alleged offences is made out against him and his
incarceration is not warranted. There are no factors at play in
the case at hand that may work against grant of bail to the
accused-petitioner and he has been made accused based on
conjectures and surmises.
3. Contrary to the submissions of learned counsel for the
petitioners, learned Public Prosecutor opposes the bail
application and submits that the present case is not fit for
enlargement of accused on bail.
4. I have considered the submissions made by both the parties
and have perused the material available on record. The
petitioner is incarcerated in this case since last one and half
years and the case is exclusively triable by Magistrate. As per
Section 437(6) of Cr.P.C., the trial of such cases should be
concluded within a period of first 60 days from the date of
enunciation of trial which in this case has expired. This Court
has elaborately dealt with the bail jurisprudence pertaining to
offences which are triable by a court of Magistrate and has
passed a detailed order in Dharmendra vs. State of
Rajasthan (S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application
No.11530/2023) vide order dated 07.10.2023. In view of the
deliberation and enunciation made therein and since there is
high probability that the trial may take long time to conclude,
it is deemed suitable to grant the benefit of bail to the
petitioner in the present matter.
5. Accordingly, the instant bail application under Section 439
Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the accused-petitioner
(Downloaded on 19/05/2025 at 09:59:28 PM)
[2025:RJ-JP:20864] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-6188/2025]
as named in the cause title shall be enlarged on bail provided
he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with
two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the
learned trial Judge for his appearance before the court
concerned on all the dates of hearing as and when called
upon to do so.
(FARJAND ALI),J
21-Chhavi/-
(Downloaded on 19/05/2025 at 09:59:28 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
[ad_2]
Source link