Dismissed

Satyawan @ Kalu S/O Satyroop @ Satroop v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC14 Jul 2025CRLMB/3629/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Fourth bail application under Section 483 BNSS in a Section 302 IPC murder case where trial was at defence-evidence stage after earlier directions to conclude it within six months. Citing delay and parity with co-accused, counsel sought bail; the Court declined bail considering other pending criminal cases against the applicant.

What the court decided

AI extract

Satyawan @ Kalu S/O Satyroop @ Satroop Vs… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Rajasthan HC (2025)

¶1

[2025:RJ-JP:26135]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 4th Bail Application No. 3629/2025

¶4

Satyawan @ Kalu S/o Satyroop @ Satroop, Aged About 26 Years, R/o Khanpur, Police Station Singhana, District Jhunjhunu (Raj.) (At Present Lodge At Sub District Jail Khetri, District Jhunjhunu (Raj.)

¶5

----Accused-Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Applicant(s)	: Mr. Sudhir Yadav,Adv.
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Rajesh Choudhary, GA-cum-AAG
	Ms. Arti Sharma, Dy.GA
	Mr. Vivek Sharma,Add.GA

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR

¶11

Order

¶12

14/07/2025

¶13

This 4th bail application has been filed by the accusedapplicant under Section 483 of the B.N.S.S, 2023 in connection with FIR No. 137/2021, registered at Police Station Singhana, District Jhunjhunu (Raj.) for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323 & 302 of IPC.

¶14

Learned counsel for the accused-applicant submits that the accused-applicant has falsely been implicated in this case. Learned counsel contends that co-accused-Sarjeet Swami has been enlarged on bail by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No.5558/2022 vide order dated 11.05.2022. Learned counsel further contends that while disposing of third bail application, the trial Court was directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same within six months, but

[2025:RJ-JP:26135]

[CRLMB-3629/2025]

(2 of 3)

the trial of the accused-applicant has not been concluded yet, therefore, he should be enlarged on bail.

¶19

On the other hand, learned Public Prosecutor opposes the bail application.

¶20

Heard learned counsel for the parties and also perused the material available on record.

¶21

Vide order dated 30.06.2025, the trial Court was directed to submit the report regarding status of trial. A letter from trial Court has been received, according to which the accused-applicant has been examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and the matter is fixed for defence evidence.

¶22

Learned counsel in support of his contention relies upon the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ghanshyam Sharma Vs. The State of Rajasthan , decided on 10.01.2020 in S.L.P. (Crl.) No. 5397/2019, and the orders passed by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Mahesh Kumar Saini Vs. State of Rajasthan passed in S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 2nd Bail Application No.5510/2023; Rajendra Kumar Vs. State of Rajasthan passed in S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 3rd Bail Application No.2062/2025; Savanta Vs. State of Rajasthan passed in S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous VII Bail Application No.3701/2022 and Naveen Vs. State of Rajasthan, passed in S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 2nd Bail Application No.8566/2023. Learned counsel submits that the trial is at its fag end, therefore, the accused-applicant be granted benefit of bail. 7. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case and also the fact that other criminal cases are registered against the accused-applicant, though, as submitted by learned counsel

[2025:RJ-JP:26135]

[CRLMB-3629/2025]

(3 of 3)

for the accused-applicant, in most of the cases, the accusedapplicant has been acquitted and the fact that the trial is at the stage of defence evidence, therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits/demerits of the case, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the accused-applicant.

¶27

Accordingly, this criminal miscellaneous bail application is dismissed.

¶28

(ASHUTOSH KUMAR),J

¶29

Mohita /8

Satyawan @ Kalu S/O Satyroop @ Satroop v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Satyawan @ Kalu S/O Satyroop @ Satroop v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Santosh Shankar Rav Patil S/O Shri Shankarlal Tataya Sahib Patil Vs State of Rajasthan

Asha Devi S/O Babulal Vs State of Rajasthan

Sonu @ Chuha S/O Mannulal Vs State of Rajasthan

Junaid S/O Aameen Vs State of Rajasthan

Hari Prasad @ Sonu S/O Radhey Shyam Vs State of Rajasthan

Rohit S/O Bhagmal Vs State of Rajasthan