Sohel S/O Sh. Abdul Majeed Vs State of Rajasthan

[2025:RJ-JP:48845]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 13093/2025

Sohel S/o Sh. Abdul Majeed, Aged About 20 Years, R/o Chokuti Phatak, Kadari Floor Meel Ke Peeche Wali Gali, Bikaner, P.s Nayasar, District Bikaner. At Present Behind Sufi Baba Ki Dargah, Badali Road, Bachha Khada Nagaur, P.s. Kotwali, Nagaur. At Present Tenant Abad Mardan Ali Ka Makan, Lal Ground Stadioum Ke Pass Guljarpura Mohalla, Jodhpur, P.s. Udai Nagar Mandir, District Jodhpur (Raj.) (At Present In J.c At District Jail Central Jail, Jaipur).

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

Connected With

¶10

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 13094/2025 Kanhaiya Lal Sharma @ Chiku Pandit S/o Sh. Suresh Kumar Sharma, Aged About 20 Years, R/o Ward No. 27, Parsuram Nagar Degawas, P.s. Taranagar, District Churu (Raj.) At Present Residing At I.m.l. Containers Pvt. Ltd. Chirota Road, Opposite Shiv Mandir Riico Area, Bagaru, District Jaipur (Raj.) (At Present In J.c At District Jail Central Jail, Jaipur).

¶11

----Petitioner

¶12

Versus

¶13

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶14

----Respondent

¶15

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. Majhar Hussain
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Rhishi Raj Singh Rathore, PP
	Mr. Rajendra Singh,CI,SHO,Bagru

¶16

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN

¶17

Order

¶18

02/12/2025

¶19

The instant bail applications have been filed under Section 483 BNSS on behalf of accused-applicants. The accusedapplicants were arrested in connection with FIR No. 175/2025 registered at Police Station Bagru District Jaipur (West) for the offence(s) under Sections 309(4), 3(5) of BNS and 3/25 of Arms Act.

[2025:RJ-JP:48845]

[CRLMB-13093/2025]

(2 of 3)

Learned counsel for the accused-applicants submitted that the applicants are young boys aged 20 years. It is submitted that charge-sheet has been filed and the applicants have been in custody ever since 22.04.2025. It is further submitted that provisions of BNSS have been bypassed and Test Identification parade has been committed without following due procedure. It is also submitted that present case is of false implication as present applicants were not present at scene and there is no requirement of any custodial detention. Further, there are allegations of loot of Rs. 8 Lacs, which is also submitted to be recovered and no recovery is pending as on date. Learned counsel further submitted that the conclusion of trial is likely to take a long time and no useful purpose would be served by keeping the applicants behind bars till disposal of the case.

¶24

Per contra , learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail applications. Investigating Officer has marked in the Court and has submitted that present matters are not less than heinous offence where in open day light, around 6.00 pm in the evening, in open market, crime has been committed and a team of accused along with multiple arms have been entered the jewelry shop. Investigating Officer has relied upon the CCTV footage and photographs, which were recovered during investigation. It is also submitted that recovery has taken place and two persons i.e. present accused-applicants have been caught and three persons who are from other states, are yet absconding. Further, it is submitted that if at this stage, accused-applicants will release on bail, investigation will be effected.

[2025:RJ-JP:48845]

[CRLMB-13093/2025]

(3 of 3)

Having heard the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and considering the fact that recovery of the looted rupees has been made from the accused-applicants; that heinous crime has been committed by accused-applicants that and looking to the overall facts and circumstances of the case and material on record but without commenting on merits/demerits of the case, this court is not inclined to allow the bail application of the accused-applicants.

¶29

Accordingly, the bail applications under Section 483 BNSS are dismissed.

¶30

A copy of present order be placed in the connect application.

¶31

(SAMEER JAIN),J

¶32

Pooja /68-69

Sohel S/O Sh. Abdul Majeed v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sohel S/O Sh. Abdul Majeed v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Laxman Singh S/O Gopi Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Suraj S/O Kanaram Vs State of Rajasthan

Vikram Singh Meena S/O Shri Jaisingh Meena Vs State of Rajasthan

Vikas Sharma S/O Late Gopal Lal Sharma Vs State of Rajasthan

Gyansingh @ Lara S/O Babulal Vs State of Rajasthan

Kanhaiya Lal Sharma @ Chiku Pandit S/O Sh. Suresh Kumar Sharma Vs State of Rajasthan