Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Ghanesh vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:22187) on 8 May, 2025

Author: Manoj Kumar Garg

Bench: Manoj Kumar Garg

[2025:RJ-JD:22187]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
    S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 5129/2025

Ghanesh S/o Rama Ji, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Daulpura Ps
Revdar, Dist. Sirohi. (Lodged In Dist. Jail Sirohi)
                                                                   ----Petitioner
                                    Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through PP
                                                                 ----Respondent


For Petitioner(s)         :     Mr. Umesh Kant Vyas
For Respondent(s)         :     Mr. Deepak Choudhary, GA cum AAG
                                with Mr. Kuldeep Singh Kumpawat



          HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG

Judgment

08/05/2025

The present 2nd bail application has been filed under Section

483 B.N.S.S. (old Section 439 Cr.P.C.) 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 offences

punishable under Sections 302, 201, 364 & 120-B of IPC.

The first bail application filed by the petitioner was dismissed

as not pressed vide order dated 04.11.2023 passed by this Court.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner

has been in judicial custody since 23.09.2021 and up to this time

only 10 prosecution witnesses have been examined out of a total

29 witnesses. Counsel further submits that co-accused persons

namely Mangla, Smt. Kamla and Pintu @ Prakash have already

been enlarged on bail by this Court and the case of present

[2025:RJ-JD:22187] (2 of 4) [CRLMB-5129/2025]

petitioner is similar to that of them. The petitioner has been

behind the bars for some time and trial of the case is yet pending.

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.

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

[2025:RJ-JD:22187] (3 of 4) [CRLMB-5129/2025]

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 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 has been in judicial custody since 23.09.2021

and the trial of the case will take sufficiently long time. With these

submissions, learned counsel for the petitioner prayed that the

benefit of bail may be granted to the accused-petitioner.

Learned AAG has opposed the prayer of bail.

I have considered the arguments advanced before me and

gone through the material available on record.

Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances

of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the

case, I deem it just and proper to grant bail to the accused

petitioner.

[2025:RJ-JD:22187] (4 of 4) [CRLMB-5129/2025]