Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Yogendra vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:27285) on 17 June, 2025
Author: Farjand Ali
Bench: Farjand Ali
[2025:RJ-JD:27285]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 6333/2025
Yogendra S/o Shri Ramgopal Sharma, Aged About 58 Years,
Resident Of Ward No. 15, Ratannagar, Tehsil And District Churu
(Raj.) (At Present Lodged In District Jail Churu)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Devednra Mahlana
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sri Ram Choudhary, PP
Mr. SK Verma
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI
Order
17/06/2025
1. The jurisdiction of this Court has been invoked by way of
filing an application under Section 439 Cr.P.C./483 BNSS at
the instance of accused-petitioner. The requisite details of the
matter are tabulated herein below:
S.No. Particulars of the Case
2. Concerned Police Station Ratan Nagar
3. District Churu
4. Offences alleged in the FIR Under Sections 108, 3(5)
of BNS
5. Offences added, if any -
6. Date of passing of impugned 21.05.2024
order
2. It is contended on behalf of the accused-petitioner that no
case for the alleged offences is made out against him and his
incarceration is not warranted. There are no factors at play in
[2025:RJ-JD:27285] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-6333/2025]
the case at hand that may work against grant of bail to the
accused-petitioner and he has been made an accused based
on conjectures and surmises.
3. Contrary to the submissions of learned counsel for the
petitioner, learned Public Prosecutor opposes the bail
application and submits that the present case is not fit for
enlargement of accused on bail.
4. I have considered the submissions made by both the parties
and gone through material available on record, more
particularly the so called suicide note purportedly written by
the deceased Mahendra Kumar before ending his life.
A perusal of the FIR, other material and the content of suicide
note suggesting financial constraints of the deceased. He
committed suicide at his own and as per him, the compelling
reasons behind his drive to end his life was money borrowed
by him from four persons. The suicide note reflects that he
borrowed Rs.6,00,000/- and for which Rs.55,000/- interest
was paid by him and this has been shown as ground
compelling him to end his life. Whether the facts and
circumstances of the case and the act alleged would
constitute an offence for abatement to commit suicide will
surely be a question to moot and the same can be
adjudicated by the trial court after taking on record the entire
evidence, however, as on date, I see no reason to longavate
the detention of petitioner of aforesaid accusation. He is
behind the bars and resident of the address mentioned in the
bail application and no apprehension has been shown that if
[2025:RJ-JD:27285] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-6333/2025]
released on bail, he would not flee from justice and would be
readily available for trial and would not hamper or temper the
evidence. There is high probability that the trial may take
long time to conclude. Considering the above and taking
guidance from judgment passed by Hon'ble the Supreme
Court in case of Amalendu Pal @ Jhantu Vs. State of West
Bengal, AIR 2010, SC 512 and Madan Mohan Singh Vs. Sate
of Gujarat & Anr., AIR 2011, SC 806, it is deemed suitable to
grant the benefit of bail to the petitioner in the present
matter.
5. Accordingly, the instant bail application under Section 439
Cr.P.C./483 BNSS is allowed and it is ordered that the
accused-petitioner as named in the cause title 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 as and
when called upon to do so.
(FARJAND ALI),J
73-chhavi/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
