Allowed

Akhtar Hussain Bhayyu S/O Abdul Khalik v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC8 Apr 2025CRLMB/3954/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Second bail application by an accused facing trial under Section 302 IPC whose earlier bail was forfeited after absence from court. Court allowed bail subject to furnishing personal bond and sureties, noting prior enlargement on bail and likely delay in trial.

What did the court decide?

Applicant to be released on bail on personal bond of Rs.1,50,000/- and three solvent sureties of Rs.50,000/- each, subject to appearing on all hearing dates.

Akhtar Hussain Bhayyu S/O Abdul Khalik Vs State of Rajasthan — Bail and Remand | Rajasthan HC (2025)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous II Bail Application No. 3954/2025

¶3

Akhtar Hussain @ Bhayyu S/o Abdul Khalik, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Near Bibi Jhohra Masjid, Patanpole, Chandraghanta, P.s. Makabra, Dist. Kota (Raj.) (At Present Confined In Central Jail Kota).

¶4

----Applicant

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

¶7

----Respondent

¶8

For Applicant	: Mr. Amit Dadhich,Adv.
For Respondent	: Ms. Arti Sharma,Dy. G.A.

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR

¶10

Order

¶11

08/04/2025

¶12

The present second bail application has been filed by the accused-applicant under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023.

¶13

Leaned counsel for the accused-applicant submits that the accused-applicant was enlarged on bail by Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 05.08.2020 passed in S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No.6803/2020. Learned counsel for the accused-applicant also submits that thereafter, on 26.02.2024, the accused-applicant could not attend the Court due to illness of his wife, therefore, his bail bonds were forfeited. Learned counsel further submits that the accused-applicant was produced before learned Additional Sessions Judge No.6, Kota (hereinafter referred to as learned 'trial Court') on 30.01.2025 and on the same day, he

¶14

[CRLMB-3954/2025]

¶15

(2 of 3)

¶16

was taken into custody and since then, the accused-applicant is behind the bars.

¶17

Learned counsel for the accused-applicant contends that learned trial Court has rejected the bail application of the accusedapplicant vide order dated 05.02.2025. Learned counsel also contended that the accused-applicant has deposited the amount of Rs.10,000/- of the forfeited bail bonds, as ordered by learned trial Court.

¶18

Learned counsel for the accused-applicant argues that the accused-applicant is ready and willing to furnish fresh bail bonds and trial will take long time to conclude, therefore, the accusedapplicant be granted benefit of bail.

¶19

Learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposes this second bail application. 6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and also perused the material available on record. 7. Admittedly, the accused-applicant is facing the trial for the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC before learned trial Court. The accused-applicant was granted benefit of bail vide order dated 05.08.2020 passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No.6803/2020. The accused-applicant was on bail till 26.02.2024 and on 26.02.2024, due to his absence from the trial Court, his bail bonds were forfeited. The accused-applicant is behind the bars since 30.01.2025.

¶20

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, and considering the fact that the applicant was already enlarged

¶21

(3 of 3)

¶22

[CRLMB-3954/2025]

¶23

on bail by the Coordinate Bench of this Court and trial will take long time to conclude, but without expressing any opinion on the merits/demerits of the case, this Court deems it proper to allow the bail application filed by the petitioner.

¶24

Consequently, this second bail application filed under Section 483 of the B.N.S.S, 2023 is allowed. It is ordered that the applicant- Akhtar Hussain @ Bhayyu S/o Abdul Khalik , arrested in FIR No.9/2020, registered at Police Station Kaithunipole, District Kota shall be released on bail; provided he furnishes personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,50,000/- and three solvent sureties of Rs.50,000/- to the satisfaction of learned trial Court. The applicant shall be required to appear before that Court on all dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.

¶25

(ASHUTOSH KUMAR),J

¶26

AARZOO ARORA /21

Akhtar Hussain Bhayyu S/O Abdul Khalik v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Akhtar Hussain Bhayyu S/O Abdul Khalik 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

Ramesh Chand Bairwa Son of Parmaram Bairwa Owner Filling Station Vs State of Rajasthan

Panna Ram S/O Shri Maga Ram Vs State of Rajasthan

Surendra Chaudhary Son of Shri Satyanarayan Vs State of Rajasthan

Dinesh Vishnoi S/O Shri Haru Ram Vishnoi Vs Union of India

Vishnu S/O Gatya Vs State of Rajasthan

Mukesh S/O Ramlal Vs State of Rajasthan