Allowed

Vikram Singh Gurjar @ Vikram Katariya S/O Amarsingh Gurjar v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC4 Apr 2025CRLMB/855/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a bail application under Section 483 of BNSS, noting the offences were triable by Magistrate, the trial would take considerable time, and the petitioner had been in custody for several months. Bail was granted on personal bond and sureties with conditions regarding police attendance and non-reoffending.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted on personal bond of Rs. 50,000 and two sureties of Rs. 25,000 each, subject to monthly police station attendance and no further offences.

Vikram Singh Gurjar @ Vikram Katariya S/O Amarsingh Gurjar… — Bail and Remand | Rajasthan HC (2025)

¶1

[2025:RJ-JP:15229]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 855/2025

¶4

Vikram Singh Gurjar @ Vikram Katariya S/o Amarsingh Gurjar, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Katariya Ka Bas P.s. Harsora, District Kotputli-Behror. (Accused In Sub Jail Behror).

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Jai Raj Tantia For Respondent(s) : Ms. Arti Sharma, PP

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN

¶11

Order

¶12

04/04/2025

¶13

The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS, on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.421/2024 registered at Police Station Bansur, District Kotputli-Behror (Raj.) for the offences punishable under Sections 309(4), 115(2), 126(2), 333 & 351(3) of BNS. Investigation is being conducted for the offences punishable under Sections 309(4), 115(2), 126(2), 333, 351(3) & 238-B of BNS.

¶14

It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel submits that alleged offences are triable by Magistrate. Trial of the case will take considerable time in its conclusion. Petitioner is in custody since 03.01.2025 and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose.

(2 of 3)

[2025:RJ-JP:15229]

[CRLMB-855/2025]

Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner. She submits that petitioner is a habitual offender as twelve other cases have been registered against him.

¶19

I have considered the contentions.

¶20

Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by both the parties, as also the fact that alleged offences are triable by Magistrate; trial will take considerable time in its conclusion as well as looking to the custody period, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it proper to allow the bail application.

¶21

This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner - Vikram Singh Gurjar @ Vikram Katariya S/o Amarsingh Gurjar, shall be released on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/(Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court with the stipulation that he shall appear before that Court and any court to which the matter is transferred, on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.

¶22

It is made clear that the accused-petitioner shall not involve in any other offence(s) during currency of the bail and he shall mark his presence in first week of every month in the concerned police station, till trial is concluded.

¶23

Concerned SHO is directed to maintain a register recording

[2025:RJ-JP:15229]

[CRLMB-855/2025]

(3 of 3)

the attendance of the petitioner, as directed above. In case the petitioner fails to mark his presence in the concerned police station, as directed above, the concerned SHO is directed to immediately report the matter to the concerned Court in this regard.

¶28

If breach of any of these conditions is reported or come to the notice of the Court, the same shall alone be a reason for the trial Court to cancel the bail granted to him by this Court.

¶29

The observation made herein above is only for decision of the instant bail application and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner.

¶30

(ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J

¶31

GAUTAM JAIN /113

Vikram Singh Gurjar @ Vikram Katariya S/O Amarsingh Gurjar v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vikram Singh Gurjar @ Vikram Katariya S/O Amarsingh Gurjar 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

Motilal S/O Badrilal Vs State of Rajasthan

Manoj S/O Ashok Vs State of Rajasthan

Manvendra Son of Suresh Vs State of Rajasthan

Rahul S/O Prabhdayal Vs State of Rajasthan

Kasim Khan @ Pav Son of Shri Mehmud Hasan @ Munna Vs the State of Rajasthan

Krishan Kumar @ Polad S/O Shimbhudayal Vs State of Rajasthan