Sushil Kumar vs State Of Rajasthan (2023:Rj-Jd:44546)
2023 Latest Caselaw 10983 Raj

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Sushil Kumar vs State Of Rajasthan (2023:Rj-Jd:44546) on 19 December, 2023

Author: Vijay Bishnoi

Bench: Vijay Bishnoi

[2023:RJ-JD:44546]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
     S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 360/2023

Sushil Kumar S/o Mahendra Kumar, Aged About 28 Years, R/o
Surjeet Colony Gali No. 11 Sriganganagar Presently Sub Branch
Manager Axis Bank Sangariya Dist. Hanumangarh Raj. (At
Present Lodged Is In J.c. Sub Jail Sangariya)
                                                                   ----Petitioner
                                    Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
                                                                 ----Respondent


For Petitioner(s)         :     Mr. Budha Ram Godara
For Respondent(s)         :     Mr. Sharwan Bishnoi, PP



               HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI

Judgment / Order

19/12/2023

Heard.

This is the third bail application preferred on behalf of the

petitioner with a prayer for releasing him on bail.

As per the charge-sheet, the petitioner, while working as

Manager of the Axis Bank, Dhanmandi, Sangariya, District

Hanumangarh, hatched a conspiracy with the other co-accused

persons, on the basis of which, the co-accused persons committed

the offence of robbery in the bank, where the petitioner was

working as Manager and looted around rupees one crore.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the

petitioner is in custody since 21.10.2020 and out of total 26

prosecution witnesses, only 5 witnesses have been examined till

date. It is also submitted that the co-accused persons, who

committed the robbery, have already been enlarged on bail.

Learned counsel has further submitted that there is no evidence

[2023:RJ-JD:44546] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-360/2023]

available on record which suggests that the petitioner was

connected with the co-accused persons, who allegedly committed

bank robbery. It is, therefore, prayed that the petitioner may be

enlarged on bail.

Per contra, learned Public prosecutor has opposed the bail

application and argued that the petitioner, while working as

Manager in the bank, hatched a conspiracy with the other co-

accused persons, which resulted into bank robbery, wherein

rupees one crore has been looted. It is further argued that while

working as a Manager of a bank, if the petitioner has conspired to

commit offence of robbery in the same bank, he is not entitled to

be enlarged on bail on the basis of his conduct.

Heard and perused the charge-sheet.

The police, while conducting investigation, has collected

evidence to prove the charges against the petitioner of this effect

that he hatched a conspiracy with the other co-accused persons to

commit robbery in the bank, where he was working as a bank

Manager. If Manager of a bank, whose duty is to supervise the

affairs of the bank, where the public money is being deposited, is

involved in commission of crime of robbery in the same bank, it is

a serious crime which may erode the faith of the public at large in

banking system.

Taking into consideration the overall facts and circumstances

of the case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

Hence, this bail application is dismissed.

However, the trial court is expected to expedite the trial.

(VIJAY BISHNOI),J 7-DivyaTak/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)