Ramesh Bacchda S/O Bhanwar Lal vs The State Of Rajasthan
2022 Latest Caselaw 3580 Raj/2

       HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                   BENCH AT JAIPUR

  S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 3rd Bail Application No. 6470/2022

Ramesh Bacchda S/o Bhanwar Lal, R/o Piplima Rudi P.s. Manasa,
Dist. Neemach (M.p.) At Present In Dist. Jail Sikar, Rajasthan.
(Presently Lodged Dist. Jail, Sikar)
                                                                  ----Petitioner
                                   Versus
The State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p.
                                                                ----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Tarun Agarwal, Adv. on behalf of Mr. Naman Mohnot, Adv.

For Respondent(s)        :     Mr. S.S. Mahla, PP



              HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJEET SINGH

                                    Order

06/05/2022

The present third bail application has been filed under

Section 439 Cr.P.C. The petitioner has been arrested in connection

with FIR No.203/2018 Registered at Police Station Ranoli, District

Sikar for the offence(s) under Sections 457 and 382 of IPC. (in

FIR) and for the offences under Sections 457, 392 and 3A of I.P.C.

(in order).

Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has

been falsely implicated in this matter and the petitioner is entitled

for release on bail under Section 437(6) Cr.P.C. and under Section

439-A Cr.P.C. and relied upon the judgment passed by the Hon'ble

Supreme Court in the matter of Sanjay Chandra Vs. Central

Bureau of Investigation reported in (2012) 1 SCC 40 and in

the matter of Mulana Mohammed Amir Rashdi Vs. State of

Uttar Pradesh & Anr., reported in (2012) 2 SCC 382 and also

(2 of 2) [CRLMB-6470/2022]

relied upon the judgment passed by the Punjab and Haryana High

Court at Chandigarh in the matter of Anil Kumar Vs. State of

Punjab, CRM-M-5846-2022, decided on 18.04.2022.

Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application

and submitted that the petitioner is a habitual offender and as per

the order passed by the trial Court, 42 other criminal cases are

pending against the petitioner.

In the facts and circumstances of the present case and

looking to the seriousness of the offence(s) alleged against the

petitioner and looking to the criminal antecedents of the petitioner

and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, no

case is made out for grant of bail to the petitioner under Section

439 Cr.P.C.

Hence, the third bail application stands dismissed.

(INDERJEET SINGH),J

JYOTI /24

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)