Leelaram S/O Shri Sultan Vs State of Rajasthan

The instant second bail application has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.375/2024 registered at Police Station Chandwaji, District Jaipur Rural (Raj.) for the offences punishable under Sections 189(2), 109(1) and 331(7) of BNS, 2023. After completion of investigation, police filed charge-sheet in this matter for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1), 126(2), 115(2) and 3(5) of BNS, 2023.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that first bail application of the petitioner was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to renew the prayer of bail after recording testimony of complainant Kali Devi and injured witness Sandeep Nayak. Now, aforesaid witnesses have been examined during the course of

¶15

(2 of 3)

¶16

[2025:RJ-JP:38043]

¶17

[CRLMB-11558/2025]

¶18

trial. Thus, this second bail application has been preferred by the petitioner.

¶19

It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Learned counsel submits that no allegation has been levelled against the petitioner in the statement of eye-witnesses and complainant. He further submits that he has been made accused on the basis of some other witnesses who have been examined after 1.5 months of the alleged incident. He argues that deceased was admitted in the hospital and it was disclosed that he sustained head injury on account of a stone falling on his head. He further argues that charge-sheet has already been filed and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. He contends that petitioner is in custody since 16.10.2024 and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose.

¶20

Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶21

I have considered the contentions.

¶22

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 statement of complainant and injured witness Sandeep Nayak; material available on record in the form of charge-sheet and trial will take time in its conclusion as well as looking to the period of custody, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it proper to allow the second bail application.

(3 of 3)

[2025:RJ-JP:38043]

[CRLMB-11558/2025]

This second bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner - Leelaram S/o Shri Sultan 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.

¶27

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.

¶28

(ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J

¶29

MADAN/76

Leelaram S/O Shri Sultan v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Leelaram S/O Shri Sultan v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

National Investigating Agency Vs State of Rajasthan

Madhav Kumar Saini @ Mintu @ Chandi S/O Rajesh Kumar Saini Vs State of Rajasthan

Vinod Kumar Sharma S/O Shri Ramkaran Sharma Vs State of Rajasthan

Yogesh Kulshrestha S/O Suresh Kulshrestha Vs State of Rajasthan

Gurvindra Singh S/O Dalbara Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Hemant Kumar Vijay S/O Shri Navalkishore Vijay Vs State of Rajasthan