SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Raj) 253

IN THE HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
YOGENDRA KUMAR PUROHIT, J
Dharmnarayan Singh - Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan - Respondent
CRLMB 2781 of 2025
Decided On : 21-03-2025

Advocates Appeared:
Mr. Varun Arora through VC, Mr. Dilip Choudhary, Mr. Shreekant Verma, Mr. Vikas K Bishnoi, Mr. Hanuman Prajapati, PP

The court has discretion to grant bail based on the circumstances of the case, emphasizing fairness and the lengthy trial process.

Headnote:

(A) BNS Act, 2025 - Sections 111(2)

(B), 111(3), 111(6), 318(2), 318(4), 319(2), 303(2), 61(2)(A) - Information Technology Act, 2000 - Sections 66-C, 66-D - Bail application - Applicants arrested in connection with FIR for multiple offences - Co-accused granted bail, applicants claim false implication - Court emphasized the need for a fair trial and the lengthy nature of proceedings - Bail granted on conditions. (Paras 1-5)

(B) Bail - Court's discretion - The court has the authority to grant bail considering the facts and circumstances of each case, without delving into the merits of the case. (Para 4)

Order :

1. The instant bail applications have been filed by the applicants under Section 483 BNSS (439 Cr.P.C.). The applicants have been arrested in connection with FIR No. 23/2025 registered at Police Station Jai Narayan Vyas Colony, District Bikaner for the offence(s) under Section 111(2)(B), 111(3), 111(6), 318(2), 318(4), 319(2), 303(2), 61(2) (A) of BNS and 66-C, 66-D of IT Act.

2. Learned counsel for the accused-applicants submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the case. Co-accused Gurdev and Vikas have already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 24.02.2025 in SB Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 1606/2025. This matter is similar to co-accused case. He further submits that regarding the documents found by the police, it has been stated that Harish Jain, Sandeep Singh and Nitin Solanki had given the bank account papers to Rohit Singh. The applicants are behind the bars. The trial may take long time to conclude. Thus, learned counsel submitted that the applicants may be enlarged on bail.

3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the bail applications.

4. Perused case diary and in the previous order dated 24.02.25, it was clearly mentioned in paragraph no. 4 that Harish Jain, Sandeep and Nitin Solanki had given their bank account papers to Rohit Singh because they know him. Considering the arguments advanced by the counsel for the parties and looking to the overall facts and circumstances of the case, without commenting on the merits and demerits of the case, this court deems it just and proper to enlarge the accused-applicants on bail.

5. Accordingly, the bail applications under Section 483 BNSS (439 Cr.P.C.) are allowed and it is ordered that the accused- applicant Jitendra Kumar S/o Jetharam, Dharmnarayan Singh S/o Daulal, Shivnarayan Singh S/o Daulal, Samarth S/o Mahesh Kumar, and Rohit Singh S/o Ranjit Singh arrested in connection with aforesaid FIR shall be enlarged on bail provided they furnish a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties of Rs.50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned lower court for their appearance before the court concerned on all the dates of hearing as and when called upon to do so.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top