Sunil Daal vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:33743) on 30 July, 2025

0
2

Rajasthan High Court – Jodhpur

Sunil Daal vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:33743) on 30 July, 2025

[2025:RJ-JD:33743]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR


     S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 8588/2025

Gaurav Alias Chotu S/o Shivshankar, Aged About 25 Years,
Resident Of Ward No 23, Raisinghnagar, P.s. Raisinghnagar,
District    Sri      Ganganagar         (Presently         Lodged      In   Sub-Jail,
Raisinghnagar)
                                                                       ----Petitioner
                                       Versus


State Of Rajasthan, Through PP
                                                                     ----Respondent
                                 Connected With
     S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 8017/2025
Sunil Daal S/o Shri Navinder Kumar, Aged About 32 Years, R/o
Bhompura Police Station Sameja Kothi District Sri Ganganagar
Rajasthan. (At Present Lodged In Sub Jail, Sri Raisingh Nagar)
                                                                       ----Petitioner
                                       Versus

State Of Rajasthan, Through PP
                                                                     ----Respondent


For Petitioner(s)            :     Mr. SR Godara.
                                   Mr. Naresh Tak.
                                   Mr. Yuvraj Singh.
For Respondent(s)            :     Mr. Hanuman Prajapati, PP.



           HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUKESH RAJPUROHIT

Order

30/07/2025

In S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 8588/2025 :-

1. This application for bail under Section 483 of BNSS (439

Cr.P.C.) has been filed by the petitioner, who has been arrested in

connection with F.I.R. No.114/2025 registered at Police Station

Raisinghnagar, District Sri Ganganagar, for offences under

(Downloaded on 31/07/2025 at 09:53:45 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:33743] (2 of 5) [CRLMB-8588/2025]

Sections 308(2), 308(3), 308(4), 351(3), 111(4) and 61(2) of

BNS.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

material available on record.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner

has been falsely implicated in the present case. As per the

prosecution, the petitioner is alleged to have provided

photographs and location maps of the complainant-Sunil Kumar’s

house and shop to co-accused Dharmveer @ Dharma. It is further

alleged that the said information was used to demand extortion

money to the tune of Rs. 50,00,000/- from the complainant. In

support of its case, the prosecution has relied upon call detail

records of communications between Dharmveer @ Dharma and

the petitioner, specifically dated 11.04.2025, which allegedly

indicate exchange of information and photographs between the

two.

4. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner had no

involvement in the incident and has merely been roped in on the

basis of call records. He further submits that the call details relied

upon by the prosecution are dated after the incident (dated

04.04.2025) and even after the lodging of the FIR and filing of the

charge sheet, which occurred on 08.04.2025. It is argued that

these call records do not establish any nexus with the alleged

offence.

5. Learned counsel also submits that the petitioner has no

previous criminal antecedents and has been in custody since

08.05.2025.

6. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application,

submitting that the offence is of serious nature and involves

(Downloaded on 31/07/2025 at 09:53:45 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:33743] (3 of 5) [CRLMB-8588/2025]

extortion from the complainant Sunil Kumar. He further submits

that the petitioner, in collusion with co-accused Dharmveer @

Dharma, was involved in demanding the extortion amount.

However, he is unable to dispute the fact that the call detail

records relied upon by the prosecution pertain to a period

subsequent to the incident and the FIR.

7. Having considered the rival submissions, the petitioner’s

custody since 08.05.2025, and taking into account the fact that

the material relied upon by the prosecution pertains to a period

after the incident and the FIR, as well as the likelihood of delayed

conclusion of the trial, and without expressing any opinion on the

merits of the case, this Court deems it just and proper to enlarge

the petitioner on bail.

8. Consequently, the bail application under Section 483 of BNSS

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

Gaurav Alias Chotu S/o Shivshankar, arrested in connection

with F.I.R. No.114/2025 registered at Police Station Raisinghnagar,

District Sri Ganganagar, 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.

In S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 8017/2025 :-

1. This application for bail under Section 483 of BNSS (439

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

in connection with F.I.R. No.114/2025 registered at Police

Station Raisinghnagar, District Sri Ganganagar, for offences

(Downloaded on 31/07/2025 at 09:53:45 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:33743] (4 of 5) [CRLMB-8588/2025]

under Sections 308(2), 308(3), 308(4), 351(3), 111(4) and

61(2) of BNS.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

material available on record.

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

petitioner’s bail application was rejected by the learned trial

Court solely on the ground of previous criminal antecedents. It is

submitted that out of the two cases relied upon, the petitioner

was discharged in one, and the other pertains to a period prior

to the year 2020. Learned counsel further submits that the

petitioner has been in judicial custody since 12.04.2025.

4. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the bail application and

submits that the petitioner does not deserve the benefit of bail.

5. Having considered the rival submissions and taking into

account the fact that the petitioner has remained in custody

since 12.04.2025 and that the previous antecedents are either

old or resulted in discharge, coupled with the likelihood of

delayed conclusion of the trial, and without expressing any

opinion on the merits of the case, this Court deems it just and

proper to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

6. Consequently, the bail application under Section 483 of

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

petitioner Sunil Daal S/o Shri Navinder Kumar, arrested in

connection with F.I.R. No.114/2025 registered at Police Station

Raisinghnagar, District Sri Ganganagar, 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

(Downloaded on 31/07/2025 at 09:53:45 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:33743] (5 of 5) [CRLMB-8588/2025]

to do so till completion of the trial.

(MUKESH RAJPUROHIT),J
211-212-/Jitender//-

(Downloaded on 31/07/2025 at 09:53:45 PM)

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)



Source link

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here