Shah Dhrumil vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:26965) on 11 June, 2025

Rajasthan High Court – Jodhpur

Shah Dhrumil vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:26965) on 11 June, 2025

[2025:RJ-JD:26965]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
     S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 6900/2025
Shah Dhrumil S/o Purvag Bhai, Aged About 25 Years, R/o A-27,
Shanti Tower, Near Manak Bagh, At Present Nehru Nagar, Ps
Satalite, District-Ahmedabad (Gujrat). (At Present Lodged In
Central Jail Udaipur)
                                                                   ----Petitioner
                                    Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
                                                                 ----Respondent


For Petitioner(s)         :     Mr. Ravindra Singh
For Respondent(s)         :     Mr. Kuldeep Singh Kumpawat for
                                Mr. Deepak Choudhary, GA-cum-AAG


HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL BENIWAL (VACATION JUDGE)

Order
11/06/2025

1. This application for bail under Section 483 BNSS (Section

439 Cr.P.C.) has been filed by the petitioner who has been

arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.188/2025 registered at Police

Station Savina, District Udaipur for the offences under Sections

316(2), 319(2), 318(4), 61(2) of BNS under Section 66C, 66D of

IT Act, 2008.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public

Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is not

an iota of evidence in this case to connect the petitioner with the

alleged crime. No recovery has been made from him. Learned

counsel for the petitioner also submits that no complaint has been

lodged against the petitioner for the offence of cheating. The

offences alleged against the petitioner are triable by Magistrate

and the co-accused persons have already been enlarged on bail by

learned trial Court and the case of the present petitioner is on

(Downloaded on 11/06/2025 at 08:56:15 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:26965] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-6900/2025]

better footing than that of the other co-accused. Learned counsel

for the petitioner further submits that the principal accused is

Deepen @ Deepu and the petitioner was simply working in his

employment. Learned trial Court have also recorded the fact that

the other co-accused, who was working at the call centre have

already been enlarged on bail.

4. In view of the above, learned counsel for the petitioner

submits that the petitioner may also be enlarged on bail as his

case is not distinguishable from the co-accused, whom the learned

trial Court have enlarged on bail. Lastly, learned counsel for the

petitioner submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody since

01.05.2025 and the trial of the case will take sufficiently long

time, therefore, the benefit of bail may be granted to the accused-

petitioner.

4. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently

opposed the bail application, however, he is not in a position to

dispute the fact that the role assigned in the present crime on

petitioner is not distinguishable as the role assigned to the co-

accused whom the learned trial Court have already been enlarged

on bail.

5. Having considered the rival submissions, facts and

circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on

merits/demerits of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the

petitioner on bail.

6. Consequently, the bail application under Section 483 BNSS

(Section 439 Cr.P.C.) is allowed. It is ordered that the accused-

petitioner Shah Dhrumil S/o Purvag Bhai arrested in

connection with F.I.R. No.188/2025 registered at Police Station

(Downloaded on 11/06/2025 at 08:56:15 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:26965] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-6900/2025]

Savina, District Udaipur, shall be released on bail, if not wanted in

any other case, provided he furnishes a personal bond of

Rs.50,000/- and two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each, to the

satisfaction of learned trial court, for his appearance before that

court on each & every date of hearing and whenever called upon

to do so till completion of the trial.

7. It is however, made clear that findings recorded/observations

made above are for limited purposes of adjudication of bail

application. The trial court shall not get prejudiced by the same.

(SUNIL BENIWAL (VACATION JUDGE)),J
68-AnilKC/-

(Downloaded on 11/06/2025 at 08:56:15 PM)

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)