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) 748

HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR, J
SAWAI SINGH – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF RAJASTHAN – Respondent
CRLMB / 1028 / 2025



Advocates:
Mr. D.S. Gharsana, Mr. Shardul Singh, Mr. Suresh Nehra, Mr. Sameer Pareek, PP, Mr. Hardik Gautam for complainant

Bail can be granted when allegations involve simple injuries, no criminal history exists, and trial duration is expected to be lengthy.

Headnote:(A) BNS Act - Sections 110, 115(2), 126(2), and 3(5) - Bail application - Petitioners arrested for inflicting simple injuries on the complainant - Petitioners claimed false implication and lack of criminal antecedents, seeking bail due to prolonged trial - Court noted injuries were simple and accepted bail applications. (Paras 1, 3, 6, 7)

(B) Bail - Considerations for granting bail include the nature of allegations, duration of custody, and absence of criminal history - Court emphasized that findings are limited to bail adjudication and should not prejudice the trial. (Paras 6, 8)

ORDER :

KULDEEP MATHUR, J.

These applications for bail under Section 483 BNSS have been filed by the petitioners who have been arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.14/2025 registered at Police Station Pilibanga, Dist. Hanumangarh, for the offences punishable under Sections 110, 115(2), 126(2) and 3(5) of BNS.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties at Bar. Perused the material available on record.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned counsel submitted that in the alleged incident which occurred on 06.01.2025, the injuries allegedly inflicted by the petitioners upon the complainant- Laxmi Narayan with blunt weapons are simple in nature.

4. Lastly, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioners are in judicial custody; the petitioners do not have any criminal antecedents and the trial of the case will take sufficiently long time, therefore, the benefit of bail may be granted to the accused-petitioners.

5. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the complainant have vehemently opposed the bail applications. Shri Hardik Gautam, the learned counsel for the complainant submitted that on the date of the alleged incident, the petitioners have inflicted injuries upon the injured person- Laxmi Narayan without there being any provocation from his side. It was submitted that looking to the seriousness of the allegations levelled against the present petitioner, he does not deserve to be enlarged on bail. However, learned counsels were not in a position to refute the fact that as per the case diary produced by the learned Public Prosecutor, the injuries allegedly inflicted by the petitioners upon the injured person are simple in nature.

6. Having considered the rival submissions, facts and circumstances of the case and without expressing any opinion on merits/demerits of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the bail applications filed by the petitioners deserve to be accepted.

7. Consequently, these bail applications under Section 483 BNSS are allowed. It is ordered that the accused-petitioners (1) Shrawan S/o Omprakash, (2) Jugal Kishore S/o Ganga Ram, (3) Sawai Singh S/o Sh. Arjun Singh and (4) Karan S/o Ganga Ram arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.14/2025 registered at Police Station Pilibanga, Dist. Hanumangarh, shall be released on bail, if not wanted in any other case, provided each of them furnishes a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- and two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each, to the satisfaction of learned trial court, for their appearance before that court on each & every date of hearing and whenever called upon to do so till completion of the trial.

8. 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.

9. A copy of this order be placed in each file.

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