Naveen Khan @ Obama @ Nabi @ Naved @ Nadeem S/O Naumuddin Nemi Khan Vs State of Rajasthan

[2025:RJ-JP:16928]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 2nd Bail Application No. 5285/2025

Naveen Khan @ Obama @ Nabi @ Naved @ Nadeem S/o Naumuddin Nemi Khan, R/o Village Samleti P.S. Mahua District Dausa (Raj) At Present H.N. 7 Near Subhash School Govind Nagar Chauhan Me Tenant, Near Narsing Home Indra Gandhi Nagar P.S. Udhyog Nagar Kota Rajasthan. (At Present Confined At Central Jail Kota).

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State of Rajasthan, through PP

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Faziya G. Khan For Respondent(s) : Mr. Amit Kumar Gupta, Public Prosecutor

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA

¶11

Order

¶12

22/04/2025

¶13

The accused-petitioner has filed this second bail application under Section 483 B.N.S.S. arising out of F.I.R. No.139/2024 registered with the Police Station Borkheda, District Kota City for offences under Sections 356 and 379 of IPC. However, the charge for offences punishable under Sections 392 and 34 IPC has been framed against the accused-petitioner.

¶14

Heard.

¶15

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

¶16

The accused-petitioner is in custody since 08.04.2024 and the charge for offences punishable under Sections 392 and 34 IPC

[CRLMB-5285/2025]

[2025:RJ-JP:16928]

(2 of 3)

has been framed on 22.08.2024 and the first date for recording the evidence was fixed on 05.09.2024. Even after passing of seven months from the first date fixed for recording the evidence, the learned trial Court has not concluded the trial so far.

¶21

Section 480(6) B.N.S.S., 2023 says that in case all offences are triable by the Magistrate and if, an accused is in continuous custody and trial could not be concluded within a period of sixty days from the date fixed for recording of evidence then the accused is entitled to be released on bail.

¶22

Section 480(6) of B.N.S.S., 2023 is also quoted as under:-

¶23

“(6) If, in any case triable by a Magistrate, the trial of a person accused of any non-bailable offence is not concluded within a period of sixty days from the first date fixed for taking evidence in the case, such person shall, if he is in custody during the whole of the said period, be released on bail to the satisfaction of the Magistrate, unless for reasons to be recorded in writing, the Magistrate otherwise directs.”

¶24

In the present case, the charges were framed against the petitioner on 22.08.2024 and the learned trial Court fixed the first date for recording the evidence on 05.09.2024. Even after passing of seven months from the first date fixed for recording of evidence, the trial has not been concluded so far and the offence for which charge has been framed against the petitioner under Section 392/34 IPC, is triable by the Magistrate.

¶25

In the aforesaid facts and circumstances and in view of the provision under Section 480(6) of B.N.S.S., 2023, the petitioner is entitled to be released on bail.

(3 of 3)

[2025:RJ-JP:16928]

[CRLMB-5285/2025]

This Court in case of Banwari Lal Kushwah Vs. State

¶30

of Rajasthan (S.B. Criminal Misc. Second Bail Application

¶31

No.12083/2024) , decided on 04.11.2024 has considered this issue.

¶32

The co-accused, namely, Tejpal whose case is on same footings has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 27.03.2025 in S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.4174/2025.

¶33

Taking into consideration the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and the allegations against the present petitioner, so also the provisions of Section 480(6) of B.N.S.S., 2023 and in view of the observations made in the case of Banwari Lal Kushwah(supra), this Court without expressing any opinion on the merits and demerits of the case, deems just and proper to enlarge the accused-petitioner on bail.

¶34

This second bail application is, accordingly, allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner shall be released on bail provided 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) each to the satisfaction of the trial Court with the stipulation that he shall appear before that Court or any other Court to which the matter is transferred, on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.

¶35

(GANESH RAM MEENA),J

¶36

Ashish Kumar /9

Naveen Khan @ Obama @ Nabi @ Naved @ Nadeem S/O Naumuddin Nemi Khan v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Naveen Khan @ Obama @ Nabi @ Naved @ Nadeem S/O Naumuddin Nemi Khan 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Devnarayan S/O Gyarsi Lal Gurjar Vs Mohammad Nasir S/O Mohammad Eshak

Gopal Goyal S/O Late Shri Babulal Vs Project Director

Ashish Kumar S/O Shri Subhash Saini Vs State of Rajasthan

Satyanarayan Agarwal Vs Union of India Thr Gen Manager and Anr.

Naveen Khan @ Obama @ Nabi @ Naved @ Nadeem S/O Naumuddin Nemi Khan Vs State of Rajasthan

Smt. Champa Devi W/O Chhitar Mal Vs Chola Mandlam Ms General Insurance Company Limited