Kuldeep Gehlot @ Kalu S/O Sh. Kamal Kumar Gehlot Vs State of Rajasthan

[2025:RJ-JP:27625]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous III Bail Application No. 9043/2025

Kuldeep Gehlot @ Kalu S/o Sh. Kamal Kumar Gehlot, Aged About 24 Years, R/o House No. A-10, Anandpuri, Aadharsh Nagar, Jawahar Nagar Jaipur Raj. (Presently Confined At Central Jail Jaipur).

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr.	Pallav Sharma
For Respondent(s)	: Mr.	Manvendra Singh, PP,
	Mr.	Anirudh Tyagi,
	Mr.	Saurabh Vaishnav

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR

¶11

Order

¶12

24/07/2025

¶13

The instant third bail application has been filed under Section 483 BNSS on behalf of accused-petitioner. The petitioner has been arrested in connection with FIR No.362/2024 registered at Police Station Jawahar Nagar, Jawahar City (East), District Jaipur City (East), for the offence(s) under Sections 190, 191(2), 191(3), 109(1) of BNS and Section 3/25 of Arms Act.

¶14

Learned counsel for the accused-petitioner submits that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that the other co-accused Achitya Singh @ Honey Tiger, on whom the allegations of opening the fire arm was made, has already been enlarged on bail by the Co-ordinate Bench vide order dated 30.06.2025. It is also contended that the first bail

[2025:RJ-JP:27625]

[CRLMB-9043/2025]

(2 of 4)

application of the petitioner was dismissed with the liberty to file afresh after recording of the statement of the complainant. It is further contended that the second bail application of the petitioner was dismissed on technical ground as the petitioner did not move the bail application before the concerned Trial Court. It is further contended that the charges were framed against the petitioner and the other co-accused on 05.05.2025. Thereafter, the complainant was summoned by the learned Trial Court, but the complainant avoided the process of summon issued against her by the Court and wrongly reported to the Police Officials that she was hospitalized in Tilak Hospital and Research Centre from 12.05.2025 to 24.05.2025. The petitioner has submitted certificate of Tilak Hospital which clearly mentions that Aruna Devi W/o Veerendra Kumar, plot No.775, Sandhi Colony, Jawahar Nagar, Jaipur was never admitted in Tilak Hospital and Research Center for the aforesaid period. It is further contended that the learned Trial Court made all endeavour to record the statement of the complainant and despite appearing before the Court, the complainant did not depose her statement before the court and the said fact is recorded by the Court below in the order-sheets placed before this Court. The accused-petitioner is in custody since 03.01.2025, therefore, on the grounds of long incarceration, possible delay in trial and that the main accused Achitya Singh @ Honey Tiger, has already been enlarged on bail, the third bail application of the accused-petitioner may be allowed.

¶19

Learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the complainant have vehemently opposed the third bail application

[2025:RJ-JP:27625]

[CRLMB-9043/2025]

(3 of 4)

and contended that the petitioner threatened the complainant's son Rahul Nanda, who deposed against him in another criminal case. Thereafter, the petitioner along with the other co-accused after forming unlawful assembly came to the complainant house and started threatening her and subsequently opened fire. It is also contended that the petitioner is a habitual offender and against him 10 criminal cases are pending. It is also contended that the matter is placed for recording of the evidence of the complainant in the Trial Court on 04.08.2025 as due to strike carried out by the employees, statement could not be recorded on 22.07.2025, therefore, considering the facts of the case, the third bail application of the accused-petitioner deserves dismissal.

¶24

Heard and perused the material available on record. 5. It is not desirable to express anything on the merits of the case. Considering the fact that the complainant is not turning up before the Trial Court despite all the endeavour made by the Trial Court to record her statement and the fact that the other coaccused has already been enlarged on bail, the accused-petitioner is in custody since long and further trial of the case may take considerable time, though there are several criminal cases pending against the petitioner but considering the long incarceration of the petitioner, this Court deem it just and proper to enlarge the accused-petitioner on bail.

¶25

Accordingly, the third bail application under Section 483 BNSS is allowed and it is ordered that the accused-petitioner Kuldeep Gehlot @ Kalu S/o Sh. Kamal Kumar Gehlot, in connection with FIR No.362/2024 registered at Police Station

[2025:RJ-JP:27625]

[CRLMB-9043/2025]

(4 of 4)

Jawahar Nagar, Jawahar City (East), District Jaipur City (East), shall be enlarged on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for his appearance before the court concerned on all the dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.

¶30

(PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J

¶31

Keshav/2

Kuldeep Gehlot @ Kalu S/O Sh. Kamal Kumar Gehlot v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kuldeep Gehlot @ Kalu S/O Sh. Kamal Kumar Gehlot 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

Naresh S/O Balram Vs State of Rajasthan

Suresh Deep Shahi S/O Deep Shahi Vs State of Rajasthan

Manoj Kumar Meena S/O Shri Dhannaram, Vs State of Rajasthan

Rajulal S/O Shri Bhanwar Lal, Vs the State of Rajasthan

Hanuman Son of Late Shimbhu Dayal Vs State of Rajasthan

Subhash S/O Shri Babulal, Vs State of Rajasthan