Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Raj) 10677
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
Chandra Prakash Shrimali, J
Kirtaram @ Laden – Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan – Respondent
Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 2650/2025
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Vijay Raj Bishnoi
For the Respondents: Ms. Sonu Manawat, PP
Bail granted based on absence of direct evidence linking the petitioner to the alleged crime and considering ongoing trial delays.
Headnote:The petitioner, arrested for possession of a firearm and undetermined criminal charges, applied for bail under Section 483 of BNSS (439 Cr.P.C.). The court considered the lack of direct evidence linking the petitioner to the crime and the ongoing trial duration. It was determined that the absence of linking evidence warranted bail. The court’s main issue was whether the petitioner should be released considering prior criminal antecedents. The court allowed bail on the condition of bond and sureties, cautioning against future criminal involvement.
Order
20/05/2025 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.11/2025 registered at Police Station Baytu, District Balotra for offences under Sections 3/25(6) Arms Act and under Sections 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 341(1) and
317(5) of the IPC.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per the story of the prosecution, acting on secret information during a blockade, the police intercepted a Scorpio vehicle and signaled it to stop. Upon search, a pistol was recovered from the accused- petitioner’s possession. When questioned, the accused-petitioner failed to produce valid documentation authorising possession of the pistol and the vehicle. Learned counsel further submits that the accused-petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and there is no direct evidence linking the petitioner to the alleged crime beyond mere possession. Learned counsel submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 30.01.2025 and the trial of the case will take sufficiently long time, therefore, the benefit of bail may be granted to the accused-petitioner.
Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application and submitted that there are criminal antecedents pending against the accused-petitioner.
Having considered the rival submissions, facts and circumstances of the case and considering that there is no direct evidence linking the petitioner to the alleged crime and that the cases registered against the present petitioner are pending and conviction has not been recorded, therefore, without expressing any opinion on merits/demerits of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.
Consequently, the bail application under Section 483 of BNSS (439 Cr.P.C.) is allowed. It is ordered that the accused-petitioner Kirtaram @ Laden S/o Baburam, arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.11/2025 registered at Police Station Baytu, District Balotra, 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 view of the criminal antecedent record of the accused-petitioner, it is directed that if he is found involved in any criminal activity in future, the learned Public Prosecutor is free to file bail cancellation application.
