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) 1116

HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JAIPUR BENCH)
MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN, J
HEMRAJ @ HEMU S/O SANJAY SINGH – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF RAJASTHAN – Respondent
CRLMB / 1579 / 2025



Advocates:
Mr. Navankur Dubey, Mr. N.S. Dhakad, PP

Bail may be granted when charge-sheet is filed, the accused is in custody, and the offence is triable by Magistrate.

Headnote:(A) Criminal Procedure Code - Section 483 - Indian Penal Code - Section 392 - Bail application filed for accused-petitioner arrested in a robbery case - Petitioner claims false implication and that the offence is triable by Magistrate - Charge-sheet has been filed and custody period considered - Court allows bail application. (Paras 1-6)

(B) Conditions for Bail - Accused to furnish personal bond and sureties, appear before the court, and not involve in further offences during bail - Court emphasizes that observations made are for decision on bail only. (Paras 6-9)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner is arrested for robbery and claims false implication, asserting that the case is triable by Magistrate. The petitioner has been in custody since arrest, and a charge-sheet has been filed.

Findings of Court:
The court finds that the charge-sheet is filed, the offence is triable by Magistrate, and the petitioner has been in custody long enough to warrant bail.

Issues: Whether the petitioner should be granted bail considering the accusations and his prior record.

Ratio Decidendi: The court concludes that given the circumstances, including the filing of the charge-sheet and the nature of the offence, bail is appropriate without commenting on the merits of the case.

Result: Bail application allowed.

Order :

1. The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS, on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.140/2024 registered at Police Station Gahnoli Mod, District Bharatpur (Raj.) for the offence punishable under Section 392 of IPC.

2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Learned counsel submits that alleged offence is triable by Magistrate. He further submits that charge-sheet has been filed in this matter. He argues that the petitioner is in custody since his date of arrest and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose.

3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by the counsel for the petitioner. He submits that petitioner is a habitual offender and six other cases have also been registered against him.

4. I have considered the contentions.

5. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner, especially the fact that charge-sheet has been filed in this matter; alleged offence is triable by Magistrate as well as looking to the custody period, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it proper to allow the bail application.

6. This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner Hemraj @ Hemu S/o Sanjay Singh shall be released on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court with the stipulation that he shall appear before that Court and any court to which the matter is transferred, on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.

7. It is made clear that the accused-petitioner shall not involve in any other offence(s) during currency of the bail and he shall mark his presence on 1st & 15th day of every month in the concerned police station.

8. If any breach of these conditions is reported or come to the notice of the Court, the same shall alone be a reason for the trial court to cancel the bail granted to him by this Court.

9. The observations made hereinabove is only for decision of the instant bail application and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner.

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