Allowed

Ramjanm @ Lala S/O Raghunath v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC3 Sept 2025CRLMB/11208/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Two accused sought bail under Section 483 BNSS in FIR No.262/2025 for theft-related offences under BNS. The complainant did not dispute an amicable compromise between the parties; offences were triable by Magistrate and trial would take time. Court allowed both bail applications.

What did the court decide?

Both petitioners released on bail on furnishing personal bond of Rs.50,000 each with two sureties of Rs.25,000 each.

Ramjanm @ Lala S/O Raghunath Vs State of Rajasthan — Cheating and Forgery | Rajasthan HC (2025)

¶1

[2025:RJ-JP:35396]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 11207/2025

¶4

Jitendra @ Jeetu S/o Rassilal, Aged About 24 Years, R/o Lokesh Nagar, Bilkho, Police Station Sapotara, District Karauli (Rajasthan) (At Present Confined In District Jail, Karauli).

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

Connected With

¶10

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 11208/2025 Ramjanm @ Lala S/o Raghunath, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Lokesh Nagar, Bilkho, Police Station Sapotara, District Karauli (Rajasthan) (At Present Confined In District Jail, Karauli).

¶11

----Petitioner

¶12

Versus

¶13

State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

¶14

----Respondent

¶15

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. Fateh Ram Meena with Mr. Akash Sharma
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP
For Complainant(s)	: Mr. Manju Chouhan for
	Mr. Arvind Sharma

¶16

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN

¶17

Order

¶18

03/09/2025

¶19

These bail applications have been filed under Section 483 of BNSS, on behalf of the petitioners, who have been arrested in connection with FIR No.262/2025 registered at Police Station Sapotra, District Karauli (Raj.) for the offences punishable under Sections 305(a) and 331(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, (in short ‘BNS’) 2023.

[2025:RJ-JP:35396]

[CRLMB-11207/2025]

(2 of 3)

It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that the accused-petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. Learned counsel submits that alleged offences are triable by Magistrate and offence of theft has been compounded by the parties amicably. It is contended that trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. Counsel submits that petitioners are in custody since their date of arrest and further custody of the petitioners would not serve any fruitful purpose.

¶24

Complainant of this case is present in person and he has duly been identified by his counsel. Counsel for the complainant does not dispute the factum of compromise however, learned Public Prosecutor opposes the bail applications. 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 petitioners, especially considering the fact that alleged offences are triable by Magistrate, so also the fact that matter has been resolved by the parties amicably and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion 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 these bail applications.

¶25

These bail applications are accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioners – 1) Jitendra @ Jeetu S/o Rassilal and 2) Ramjanm @ Lala S/o Raghunath shall be released on bail provided each of them furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) together

(3 of 3)

[2025:RJ-JP:35396]

[CRLMB-11207/2025]

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 they 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.

¶30

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

¶31

(ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J

¶32

GAUTAM JAIN /293-294

Ramjanm @ Lala S/O Raghunath v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramjanm @ Lala S/O Raghunath 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

Karamveer Singh S/O Bhagwan Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Teju Singh @ Tej Singh S/O Parwat Singh, Vs State of Rajasthan

Sahil Khan S/O Shri Shahid Ahmed Vs State of Rajasthan

Mukesh Kumar S/O Ramsingh Vs State of Rajasthan

Deepakchand S/O Shri Hetram Vs State of Rajasthan

Lokesh Prajapt S/O Shri Suresh Vs State of Rajasthan