Allowed¶6

Sonu Gottam S/O Harishankar v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC12 Aug 2025CRLMB/8578/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Rajasthan High Court Jaipur; CRLMB-8578/2025; bail under Section 483 BNSS; FIR No.158/2024 P.S. Nayapura Kota City; Sections 307, 341, 323 IPC and charge-sheet under Sections 307, 341, 323, 302, 450 IPC; hostile eye-witness Nirmala; eye-witness Nirma resiled in cross-examination; custody since 03.04.2024; bail granted by Anil Kumar Upman J. dated 12/08/2025; personal bond Rs.50,000/-; two sureties Rs.25,000/- each; no precedent cases cited.

What did the court decide?

Accused-petitioner Sonu Gottam S/o Harishankar directed to be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court, with stipulation to appear before that Court (and any Court to which the matter is transferred) on all subsequent dates of hearing. ¶6

Sonu Gottam S/O Harishankar Vs State of Rajasthan — Bail and Remand | Rajasthan HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶6

Issue for consideration

Whether the accused-petitioner, arrested in connection with FIR No.158/2024 (P.S. Nayapura, Kota City) for offences under Sections 307, 341 and 323 IPC and charge-sheeted additionally under Sections 302 and 450 IPC, should be released on bail under Section 483 BNSS in view of the eye-witness testimony, the pending trial and the period of custody.

¶1

Court's answer

Having regard to the totality of facts and circumstances, the material on record in the form of the charge-sheet including testimony of both eye-witnesses, the time the trial will take, and the period of custody, and without commenting on the merits or demerits of the case, the Court deemed it proper to allow the bail application.

¶5

Ratio / Principle

The accused-petitioner Sonu Gottam is to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- together with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each, to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court, with the stipulation that he appear before that Court and any Court to which the matter is transferred on all subsequent dates of hearing.

¶6

Key takeaways

The observations made in the order are only for the decision of the instant bail application and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner.obiter¶7

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail allowed. High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan, Jaipur Bench (Anil Kumar Upman, J.), order dated 12/08/2025 in S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 8578/2025: Application under Section 483 of BNSS by Sonu Gottam S/o Harishankar, arrested in connection with FIR No.158/2024 of P.S. Nayapura, District Kota City, initially booked under Sections 307, 341 and 323 IPC and, after investigation, charge-sheeted additionally under Sections 302 and 450 IPC. Of the two eye-witnesses relied on by the prosecution, Nirmala was declared hostile and Nirma, despite alleging against the petitioner in examination-in-chief, denied the entire prosecution story in cross-examination saying she had spoken according to the police. Petitioner in custody since 03.04.2024 and trial expected to take time. Considering the totality of circumstances, the charge-sheet material including both eye-witness testimonies, the likely duration of trial and the period of custody, and without commenting on merits or demerits, the Court allowed bail on a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each, stipulating attendance before the trial Court (and any transferee Court) on all subsequent dates; observations confined to the bail application with no impact on trial.

¶1

[2025:RJ-JP:31365]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 8578/2025

¶4

Sonu Gottam S/o Harishankar, Aged About 36 Years, R/o Kotda Deep Singh P.S. Budhadeet District Kota Rural Presently Near Gudu Banas House Khand Gavandi, P.S. Nayapura, Kota City (Rajasthan) (Presently Confined At Central Jail Kota).

¶5

----Accused-Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pallav Sharma, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP with Mr. Tapesh Agarwal, PP

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN

¶11

Order

¶12

12/08/2025

¶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.158/2024 registered at Police Station Nayapura, District Kota City for offences punishable under Sections 307, 341 and 323 of IPC. After completion of investigation, police has filed charge sheet in this matter for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 341, 323, 302 and 450 of IPC.

¶14

It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Learned counsel submits that petitioner has been charge-sheeted on the basis of testimony of two eye witnesses namely, Nirma and Nirmala. He further submits that eye witness-Nirmala has been

(2 of 3)

[2025:RJ-JP:31365]

[CRLMB-8578/2025]

declared hostile as she has not supported the prosecution case. He argues that though other eye witness, Nirma has levelled the allegation against the petitioner in the examination-in-chief, but in cross-examination, she has denied the entire prosecution story and stated that she gave the statement according to the police. He further argues that charge-sheet has already been filed and trial of the case will take considerable time in its conclusion. He contends that the petitioner is in custody since 03.04.2024 and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose.

¶19

Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶20

I have considered the contentions.

¶21

Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances

¶22

of the case; considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, especially considering the material available on record in the form of charge-sheet including testimony of both eye witnesses and trial will take time in its conclusion as well as looking to the period of custody, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it proper to allow the bail application.

¶23

This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner – Sonu Gottam S/o Harishankar 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

[2025:RJ-JP:31365]

[CRLMB-8578/2025]

(3 of 3)

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.

¶28

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

¶29

(ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J

¶30

MADAN/120

Sonu Gottam S/O Harishankar v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sonu Gottam S/O Harishankar 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

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Parsoti @ Purushottam S/O Raghuveer Vs State of Rajasthan

Pritam Singh @ Biddu S/O Hamam Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Vinod Kumar Son of Shri Gumanram Meena Vs the State of Rajasthan

Neowise College of Nursing Vs the State of Rajasthan

Raju S/O Gyansingh Vs State of Rajasthan

Sanjay @ Kochiya S/O Bahadur Vs State of Rajasthan