Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Mangla vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:20189) on 25 April, 2025
Author: Manoj Kumar Garg
Bench: Manoj Kumar Garg
[2025:RJ-JD:20189]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous III Bail Application No. 4647/2025
Mangla S/o Chopaji, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Dadrala, P.s.
Revdar, Dist. Sirohi (Raj.) (Presently Lodged At Dist. Jail Sirohi)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through PP
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Richin Surana
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shriram Choudhary, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG
Order
25/04/2025
The present third bail application has been filed under Section
483 B.N.S.S. on behalf of the petitioner, who is in judicial custody in
connection with F.I.R. No.112/2021 registered at Police Station
Reodar, District Sirohi for the offence punishable under Sections 302,
201, 364 & 120-B of IPC.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is
behind the bars for more than three years and up to this time only 10
prosecution witness have been examined out of total 29 prosecution
witnesses.
In support of his contentions, learned counsel placed reliance on
the judgment of Honb'le Supreme Court in the case of Balwinder
Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr. (Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.)
No.8523/2024) in which while granting bail it has been observed as
under:
" 9. The incident in the present case occurred on
25.06.2020 and the petitioner was arrested soon
thereafter on 26.06.2020. By now, 6 co-accused
have been granted bail. As the prosecution wishes
to examine 17 more witnesses, the trial is unlikely
to conclude on a near date.
[2025:RJ-JD:20189] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-4647/2025]
10. Considering the above and to avoid the
situation of the trial process itself being the
punishment particularly when there is presumption
of innocence under the Indian jurisprudence, we
deem it appropriate to grant bail to the petitioner -
Balwinder Singh. It is ordered accordingly.
Appropriate bail conditions be imposed by the
learned trial court."
A coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Umesh Vyas vs.
State of Rajasthan (S.B. Criminal Misc. II Bail Application
No.14958/2022), vide order dated 17.03.2023, also observed as
follows:
"The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of Abdul
Majeed Lone Vs. Union Territory of Jammu and
Kashmir [Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.)
No.3961/2022], Amit Singh Moni Vs. State of
Himachal Pradesh (Criminal Appeal No.668/2020),
Tapan Das Vs. Union of India [Special Leave to
Appeal (Criminal) No.5617/2021], Kulwant Singh Vs.
State of Punjab [Special Leave to Appeal (Criminal)
No.5187/2019], Ghanshyam Sharma Vs. State of
Rajasthan [Special Leave to Appeal (Criminal)
No.5397/2019], Nadeem Vs. State of UP [Special
Leave to Appeal (Criminal)
No.1524/2022] and Mukesh Vs. The State of
Rajasthan [Special Leave to Appeal (Criminal)
No.4089/2021] has granted bail to the accused
persons, against whom the allegations are of
transporting or possessing narcotic contraband above
commercial quantity, on the ground of custody period
and taking into consideration the fact that the trial
against the said accused persons will take time in
completion. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has ordered
for release of the accused persons who were in
custody from two years to four years. Learned Public
Prosecutor has opposed the bail application.
Having regard to the totality of the facts and
circumstances of the case, I deem it appropriate to
allow this fifth bail application solely on the ground of
custody period of the accused petitioner and keeping
in view the fact that the trial against him has not
been completed till date.
Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on
the merits of the case, this third bail application filed
under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is directed
that petitioner Umesh Vyas S/o Shri Ganeshlal Ji shall
be released on bail in connection with FIR
No.15/2019 of Police Station Charbhuja, District
Rajsamand provided he executes a personal bond in a
sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sound and solvent
sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of
[2025:RJ-JD:20189] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-4647/2025]
learned trial court for his appearance before that
court on each and every date of hearing and
whenever called upon to do so till the completion of
the trial."
The petitioner is in judicial custody since 23.09.2021 and the
trial of the case will take sufficiently long time. Further, counsel
submits that co-accused persons, namely Kamla and Pintu @ Prakash
have already been enlarged on bail by this Court and case of present
petitioner is not distinguishable. With these submissions, learned
counsel for the petitioner prayed that the benefit of bail may be
granted to the accused-petitioner.
Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the prayer of bail.
I have considered the arguments advanced before me and gone
through the material available on record.
It is not disputed that the accused petitioner has so far suffered
incarceration of more than 3 years and trial is still going on.
Therefore, I deem it just and proper to grant bail to the accused
petitioner under Section 483 B.N.S.S.
Accordingly, the third bail application filed under Section 483
B.N.S.S. is allowed and it is directed that petitioner - Mangla S/o
Chopaji shall be released on bail in connection with F.I.R.
No.112/2021 registered at Police Station Reodar, District Sirohi for
provided he executes a personal bond in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with
two sureties of Rs.50,000/- each to the satisfaction of learned trial
court for his appearance before that court on each and every date of
hearing and whenever called upon to do so till the completion of the
trial.
(MANOJ KUMAR GARG),J
33-GKaviya/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
