Allowed

Ashish Kumar S/O Shri Subhash Saini v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC17 Apr 2025CRLMB/4505/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This third bail application was allowed. The Rajasthan High Court observed that the trial court found the prosecution witnesses deliberately failed to produce after summons. Citing Article 21's right to speedy trial, the court deemed it just to enlarge the accused on bail without evaluating the merits of the case.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner enlarged on bail by furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 1,00,000/- with two sureties of Rs. 50,000/- each.

Ashish Kumar S/O Shri Subhash Saini Vs State of Rajasthan — Bail and Remand | Rajasthan HC (2025)

¶1

[2025:RJ-JP:16363]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Misc. 3rd Bail Application No. 4505/2025

¶4

Ashish Kumar S/o Shri Subhash Saini, Aged About 22 Years, R/o Nawalgarh, Police Station Nawalgarh District Jhunjhunu (Raj.) (At Present Accused In Judicial Custody At District Jail Jhunjhunu)

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State of Rajasthan, through PP

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Prashant Joshi For Respondent(s) : Mr. A.K. Gupta, PP Mr. D.K. Barala, for complainant

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA

¶11

Order

¶12

17/04/2025

¶13

This third bail application is filed by the accused petitioner u/S 483 BNSS in connection with FIR No. 145/2024 registered at Police Station Nawalgarh, District Jhunjunu for offences punishable u/S 452, 323, 307, 504 & 34 IPC.

¶14

The first bail application No. 10177/2024 filed by the accused petitioner was dismissed vide order dated 06.09.2024.

¶15

The second bail application No. 12257/2024 was dismissed vide order dated 09.10.2024.

¶16

Learned counsel for the accused petitioner submits that the accused petitioner is in custody since 30.04.2024 and charges have been framed on 23.09.2024. He further submits that the complainant and material prosecution witnesses are not turning up for their evidence even after issuance of bailable warrants and

[2025:RJ-JP:16363]

[CRLMB-4505/2025]

(2 of 3)

their arrest warrants. He also submits that the accused petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and his right of speedy trial as guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India is being violated as the prosecution is failing in producing the material prosecution witnesses for their examination before the trial Court.

¶21

Learned Public Prosecutor and the counsel for the complainant vehemently opposed the bail application. Counsel for the complainant submits that the injured witness has not been examined so fat and the allegation against the accused petitioner is of causing injury has been opined to be dangerous to life.

¶22

Heard and considered the submissions made at bar and also perused the material available on record including the ordersheets of the trial. 7. The Court, after going through the ordersheet of the trial Court finds that the trial Court itself on 17.02.2025 has observed that the complainant is deliberately not producing the prosecution witnesses. After going through the order-sheets of the trial Court, the Court also finds that the prosecution witnesses are not turning up even after they were summoned by bailable warrants.

¶23

Article 21 of the Constitution of India provides the speedy trial to an accused and in the present case, on going through the order-sheets of the trial Court it is reveled that the prosecution has failed to produce the prosecution witnesses and the trial Court has also observed that they are deliberately avoiding their examination. Hence, this Court without expressing any opinion on merits or demerits of the case, deems just and proper to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

[2025:RJ-JP:16363]

[CRLMB-4505/2025]

(3 of 3)

Accordingly, this third bail application is allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner shall be released on bail provided that he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/(Rupees One Lac Only), together with two sureties in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) to the satisfaction of the Trial Court with the stipulation that he shall appear before that Court or any Court to which the matter is transferred, on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.

¶28

(GANESH RAM MEENA),J

¶29

GAURAV SRIVASTAVA /14

Ashish Kumar S/O Shri Subhash Saini v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashish Kumar S/O Shri Subhash Saini 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

Gurudeep Singh @ Gagga S/O Balvinder Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Pritampuri Goswami S/O Shri Om Prakash Vs State of Rajasthan

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

Smt. Preeti Lohchab W/O Lte Shri Karamveer Vs United India Insurance Company Limited

Raghuvar Dayal Mishra S/O Shri Balmukund Mishra Vs Hari Prakash Meena S/O Shri Ram Kishan Meena

Yogesh @ Yogi S/O Ummed Singh Vs the State of Rajasthan