Allowed

Sonu S/O Radheyshyam v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC15 Apr 2025CRLMB/1477/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court allowed the third bail application of an accused charged with murder and robbery. Relying on parity with a co-accused already on bail and noting distinctions in prosecution evidence, the Court granted bail requiring a personal bond with two sureties.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner enlarged on bail to furnish a personal bond of Rs. 1,00,000/- with two sureties of Rs. 50,000/each personally to the satisfaction of the trial Judge.

Sonu S/O Radheyshyam Vs State of Rajasthan — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Rajasthan HC (2025)

¶1

[2025:RJ-JP:16046]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 3rd Bail Application No. 1477/2025

¶4

Sonu S/o Radheyshyam, Aged About 22 Years, R/o Doondi Pada, Khandar, Police Station Khandar, District Sawai Madhopur (Rajasthan) (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. Laxman Meena
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Rishi Raj Singh Rathore, Public Prosecutor
	Mr. Rajendra Prasad Gautam for complainant

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA

¶11

Order

¶12

15/04/2025

¶13

The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 on behalf of accused-petitioner in connection with FIR No.82/2023 registered at Police Station Bahrawanda Kalan, District Sawai Madhopur for the offences under Sections 392, 302 and 34 IPC.

¶14

First bail application of the petitioner bearing S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.3187/2024 was dismissed as withdrawn by this Court vide order dated 12.08.2024 with liberty to file fresh bail application after examination of the Medical Officer/s, who conducted the post-mortem of the deceased.

¶15

Second bail application of the petitioner bearing S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.12352/2024 was dismissed by

(2 of 3)

[2025:RJ-JP:16046]

[CRLMB-1477/2025]

this Court vide order dated 09.10.2024 after considering the evidence collected during investigation and also the statements of the prosecution witnesses recorded so far.

¶20

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the case of the accused-petitioner is in no manner distinguishable from the case of Brahma @ Birma who has already been enlarged on bail by this Court.

¶21

Learned counsel further submits that the accused-petitioner has been implicated in the present case on the basis of some recovery of articles said to have been belonging to the deceasedAshok.

¶22

Learned counsel further submits that initially the mother of the deceased has lodged a report on 16.08.2023 on the information given by the complainant-Hemraj wherein, it has been stated that the deceased used to go with Yogesh Teli and Sonu Mali. After two days only, Hemraj has lodged the present FIR making allegation against the accused-petitioner of last seen only. Learned counsel also submits that the accused-petitioner is in custody since 18.08.2023 and on the ground of parity, he also deserves to be enlarged on bail.

¶23

Learned Public Prosecutor as well as learned counsel for the complainant has also opposed the bail application. It is submitted that the articles belonging to the deceased have been recovered from the possession of the accused-petitioner.

¶24

Considered the submissions made at bar and also perused the material available on record.

[CRLMB-1477/2025]

[2025:RJ-JP:16046]

(3 of 3)

Having regard to the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner and more particularly the fact that the co-accused, namely, Brahma @ Birma has already been enlarged on bail and the case of the present accused-petitioner is in no manner distinguishable from the case of co-accused released on bail in view of the evidence of PW-15, this Court without expressing any opinion on the merits/demerits of the case, deems just and proper to enlarge the accused-petitioner on bail.

¶29

Accordingly, the 3rd bail application under Section 483 of the BNSS is allowed and it is ordered that the accused-petitioner named above in connection with the aforesaid FIR shall be enlarged on bail provided, he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- together with two sureties of Rs.50,000/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.

¶30

(GANESH RAM MEENA),J

¶31

Ashish Kumar /7

Sonu S/O Radheyshyam v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sonu S/O Radheyshyam 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

Rajesh Kumar Saini S/O Suraj Saini Vs State of Rajasthan

Ravi Kumar Urf Ravi Roshan Gupta S/O Shri Jagdish Rai Gupta Vs State of Rajasthan

Manoj Gurjar S/O Shri Jagram, Vs Shahrukh S/O Jafar Ali

Rahul Badawas @ Attack S/O Shri Kailash Chand Vs State of Rajasthan

Prahlad Singh S/O Shri Hanuman Singh Vs the State of Rajasthan

Shyam Pratap Singh S/O Late Shri Nathuram Vs State of Rajasthan