Ateek Rehman vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:47369)
2025 Latest Caselaw 14834 Raj

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Ateek Rehman vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:47369) on 4 November, 2025

[2025:RJ-JD:47369]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                            JODHPUR
   S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 12484/2025
Nemichand Kumawat S/o Shri Hukamaram, Aged About 36
Years, R/o Village Medi Ka Vaas, District Deedwana- Kuchaman,
At Present Residing At House No. 8, Main Road, Sector 03
Hiranmagri, Udaipur , Rajasthan (Presently Lodged In Central
Jail, Udaipur)
                                                     ----Petitioner
                              Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor
                                                   ----Respondent
                          Connected With
   S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 11897/2025
Sahil Jain S/o Ramesh Chandra Jain, Aged About 26 Years, R/o
Lakadwas, Udaipur, At Present Vidhyanagar, Section 04, Police
Station Hiranmagri, District Udaipur, Rajasthan. (At Present
Lodged In Central Jail Udaipur)
                                                     ----Petitioner
                              Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through The Public Prosecutor.
                                                   ----Respondent
   S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 11910/2025
Ateek Rehman S/o Lt. Sh. Mehfooj Rehman, Aged About 50
Years, R/o House No. 24/443 Kishanpol, Gosiya Colony, P.s.
Surajpol, Distt. Udaipur At Present 148-8 Block, Subcity Center,
P.s. Hiranmagari, Udaipur Rajasthan At Present Lodged In
Central Jail Udaipur
                                                     ----Petitioner
                              Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
                                                   ----Respondent


For Petitioner(s)         :     Mr. Awar Dan Ujjwal
                                Mr. Deepak Menaria
                                Mr. Anuj Sahlot
For Respondent(s)         :     Mr. Prem Singh Panwar, PP


      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUKESH RAJPUROHIT

Order 04/11/2025

1. The instant applications for bail under Section 483 of BNSS

(439 of Cr.P.C.) have been filed by the petitioners, who have been

arrested in the present matters. The requisite details of the

matters are tabulated herein below:

S. No.                        Particulars of the case

   2.  Police Station                    Hiranmagri

                      (Uploaded on 04/11/2025 at 06:08:47 PM)

 [2025:RJ-JD:47369]                      (2 of 3)                      [CRLMB-12484/2025]


     3.     District                    Udaipur

4. Offences alleged in the FIR Under Section 306 of IPC

5. Offences added, if any -

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the

petitioners have been falsely implicated in the present case, as the

complainant's husband (deceased), who had borrowed money

from the petitioners as well as several other persons, committed

suicide due to his inability to repay the borrowed amounts (Loan).

He further submits that the investigation is complete and that the

petitioners have no previous criminal antecedents except

petitioner Ateek Rehman, who also has only one criminal

antecedent.

3. Reliance has been placed by learned counsel for the

petitioners on paragraph 10 of the judgment rendered in Mohit

Singhal & Anr. vs. The State of Uttarakhand & Ors.

[Criminal Appeal No. 3578 of 2023], decided on 01.12.2023,

which reads as under:

"10. In the present case, taking the complaint of the third respondent and the contents of the suicide note as correct, it is impossible to conclude that the appellants instigated the deceased to commit suicide by demanding the payment of the amount borrowed by the third respondent from her husband by using abusive language and by assaulting him by a belt for that purpose. The said incident allegedly happened more than two weeks before the date of suicide. There is no allegation that any act was done by the appellants in the close proximity to the date of suicide. By no stretch of the imagination, the alleged acts of the appellants can amount to instigation to commit suicide the deceased has blamed the third respondent for landing in trouble due to her bad habits."

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the

petitioners are in custody since long and the trial of the case will

(Uploaded on 04/11/2025 at 06:08:47 PM)

[2025:RJ-JD:47369] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-12484/2025]

take sufficiently long time, therefore, the benefit of bail may be

granted to the accused-petitioners.

5. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail

application and submitted that the petitioners had allegedly given

loans to the deceased at a high interest rate.

6. In response, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that

there is no material or document to show that the petitioners

charged any higher rate of interest.

7. Having heard and considered the rival submissions, facts and

circumstances of the case, as well as considering the fact that the

petitioners have been in custody since long and the trial will take

sufficiently long time to conclude, without expressing any opinion

on the merits/demerits of the case, this Court is inclined to

enlarge the petitioners on bail.

8. Consequently, the bail applications under Section 483 of

BNSS (439 of Cr.P.C.) is allowed. It is ordered that the accused-

petitioners as named in the cause title, arrested in connection with

the above mentioned FIR, shall be released on bail, if not wanted

in any other case, provided each of them furnish a personal bond

of Rs.50,000/- and two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each, to the

satisfaction of learned trial court, for their appearance before that

court on each & every date of hearing and whenever called upon

to do so till completion of the trial.

(MUKESH RAJPUROHIT),J 170-172-/Jitender//-

(Uploaded on 04/11/2025 at 06:08:47 PM)

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)