Kaluram S/O Puranmal Vs State of Rajasthan

[2025:RJ-JP:35595]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 1463/2025

Kaluram S/o Puranmal, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Chhapuda Khurd, Police Station Bhabru, District Jaipur. (At Present Confined In Central Jail Jaipur, District Jaipur).

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Anushree Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP For Complainant(s) : Mr. Vikram Yadav

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN

¶11

Order

¶12

04/09/2025

¶13

The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.05/2023 registered at Police Station Bhabaru, District Jaipur Rural for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 304B and 120B of IPC. After completion of investigation, police filed charge-sheet in this matter.

¶14

It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Learned counsel submits that admittedly, petitioner was not present when his wife committed suicide. It is submitted that vide order dated 28.11.2024, co-accused person namely- Pooranmal who is fatherin-law of the deceased has been granted benefit of bail by the coordinate bench of this court after considering the period of incarceration. It is submitted that till date 28 witnesses have been

[2025:RJ-JP:35595]

[CRLMB-1463/2025]

(2 of 3)

examined out of 36 cited prosecution witnesses wherein one witness has been reported dead, three witnesses have been dropped by the prosecution and rest four witnesses are not appearing since long for recording their testimony therefore, further more time in conclusion of trial cannot be ruled out. Counsel submits that petitioner is in custody since 11.01.2023 and as such, he has suffered incarceration of about 2 years and 8 months. Further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose.

¶19

Learned Public Prosecutor assisted by learned counsel for the complainant vehemently opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner. It is submitted that deceased expired in her matrimonial home under unnatural circumstances within a period of two months of her marriage.

¶20

At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on last two occasions, bail application preferred on behalf of father-in-law of the deceased was refused by the co-ordinate bench of this court and his third bail application has been allowed on the ground of period of incarceration.

¶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 considering the fact that both parties are from poor background and petitioner was also working as a labour in Surat at the time of alleged incident, so also the fact that aforementioned co-accused person has been granted benefit of bail by the co-ordinate bench of this court and trial will take

[CRLMB-1463/2025]

[2025:RJ-JP:35595]

(3 of 3)

considerable time in its conclusion as well as looking to the custody period which is about 2 years and eight months, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it proper to allow the bail application.

¶27

This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner – Kaluram S/o Puranmal 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.

¶28

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

¶29

(ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J

¶30

GAUTAM JAIN /26

Kaluram S/O Puranmal v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kaluram S/O Puranmal 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

Ramjanm @ Lala S/O Raghunath Vs State of Rajasthan

Mukesh Kumar S/O Ramsingh Vs State of Rajasthan

Deepakchand S/O Shri Hetram Vs State of Rajasthan

Ramniwas Naradhaniya S/O Shanker Ram Naradhaniya Vs State of Rajasthan

Vishavjeet S/O Anant Kalita Vs State of Rajasthan

Mahesh S/O Late Bhagwan Singh Vs State of Rajasthan