Allowed

Vinod S/O Kailash v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC20 Aug 2025CRLMB/10417/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Rajasthan allowed the bail application under Section 483 BNSS. Considering the petitioner's lack of criminal antecedents and the anticipated duration of trial, the court enlarged him on bail with a personal bond and sureties without commenting on the merits of the case.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner enlarged on bail by furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each for appearance before the trial court.

Vinod S/O Kailash Vs State of Rajasthan — Cheque Dishonour | Rajasthan HC (2025)

¶1

[2025:RJ-JP:32706]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 10417/2025

¶4

Vinod S/o Kailash, Aged About 23 Years, R/o Devpura, Police Station Choth Ka Barwada, District Sawai Madhopur. (At Present Confined In District Jail, Sawai Madhopur)

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Tarun Jain and Mr. Durgesh Kumar Jangid For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shree Ram Dhakar, PP

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR

¶11

Order

¶12

20/08/2025

¶13

The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 BNSS on behalf of accused-petitioner. The accused-petitioner has been arrested in connection with FIR No. 133/2025 registered at Police Station Kotwali Sawai Madhopur, District Sawai Madhopur for the offences under Sections 318(4), 319(2), 336(3), 338 and 340(2) of BNS and Section 13 of RPGO and Section 66D of IT Act. 2. Learned counsel for the accused-petitioner submits that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that the similarly placed co-accused Rinku has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 08.08.2025. It is also contended that the accused-petitioner is in custody since 05.08.2025 and the trial/investigation of the case may take considerable time, there are no criminal antecedents

(2 of 2)

[2025:RJ-JP:32706]

[CRLMB-10417/2025]

against the accused-petitioner, therefore, the bail application of the accused-petitioner may be allowed.

¶18

Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application.

¶19

Heard and perused the material available on record.

¶20

Considering the fact that the accused-petitioner is in custody since 05.08.2025 and the trial/investigation of the case may take considerable time, there are no criminal antecedents against the accused-petitioner, without commenting anything on the merits of the case, I deem it just and proper to enlarge the accusedpetitioner on bail.

¶21

Accordingly, the bail application under Section 483 BNSS is allowed and it is ordered that the accused-petitioner Vinod S/o Kailash, in connection with FIR No. 133/2025 registered at Police Station Kotwali Sawai Madhopur, District Sawai Madhopur, shall be enlarged on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for his appearance before the court concerned on all the dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.

¶22

(PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J

¶23

Keshav/30

Vinod S/O Kailash v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vinod S/O Kailash v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vakar Yunus @ Mohammad Vakar S/O Shri Usmman Khan Vs State of Rajasthan

Pooja W/O Shri Hari Singh Vs the State of Rajasthan

Alfaiz Urf Aalu S/O Yusuf Khan Vs State of Rajasthan

Chhotu Son of Raisingh Vs the State of Rajasthan

Ramchandra S/O Sanwarmal Vs the State of Rajasthan

Abhay Singh Vs Banwari Lal and Ors.