Mahiram vs State Of Rajasthan ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 3413 Raj

[2023/RJJD/011361]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous IV Bail Application No. 15568/2022

Mahiram S/o Premchand, Aged About 22 Years, B/c Vishnoi, R/o Village Bhawad, P.s. Karwad, Dist. Jodhpur. (Presently Lodged In Central Jail, Jodhpur).

----Petitioner Versus

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. M.L. Bishnoi

For Respondent(s) : Mr. B.R. Bishnoi, PP

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI

Judgment / Order

21/04/2023

Heard.

The earlier bail application of the petitioner was

dismissed by this Court on 5.5.2022. Learned counsel for the

petitioner has submitted that as per the prosecution story,

the petitioner was apprehended by the police while

transporting 51 kgs of poppy straw in three gunny bags. It is

further submitted that as per the charge-sheet, the

prosecution has produced as many as 22 witnesses, however,

only 2 witnesses have been examined till date.

[2023/RJJD/011361] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-15568/2022]

Learned counsel for the petitioner while placing reliance

on the decision dated 28.3.2023 rendered by the Hon'ble

Supreme Court in Mohd Muslim @ Hussain Vs. State (NCT

Delhi) [Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No(s).915 of 2023]

has argued that looking to the custody period of the

petitioner, he may be enlarged on bail.

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently

opposed the bail application and argued that the petitioner

was earlier released on temporary bail on 27.2.2020 and he

was required to surrender on 7.3.2020, but he did not

surrender and absconded. It is further submitted that when

the property of the petitioner was to be attached, he

surrendered himself on 22.2.2022. Learned Public Prosecutor

has submitted that the petitioner is not entitled to be

released on bail looking to the custody period because trial

has been delayed on account of his absence only and there is

no fault of the prosecution. It is also submitted that there is

every possibility that if the petitioner is enlarged on bail, he

may not appear before the trial court, which may prolong the

trial.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after

going through the material available on record and taking into

consideration the fact that earlier the petitioner had misused

the condition of temporary bail and remained absconded for

[2023/RJJD/011361] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-15568/2022]

around two years, this Court is not inclined to enlarge him on

bail.

Hence, this fourth bail application is dismissed.

(VIJAY BISHNOI),J 44-msrathore/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)