PRAVEEN v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN
Court: High Court of Rajasthan
Bench: SUNIL BENIWAL
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Rajasthan judgment dated 2026-08-06. PRAVEEN v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
[2026:RJ-JP:37222] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S. B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 10231/2026 CNR: RJHC010770582026 | URN: CRLMB / 22421U / 2026 Praveen S/o Shree Prabhu, Aged About 23 Years, R/o Aaddhar Demat Police Station Patiya District Udaipur. (At Present Lodged In Distt. Jail Dungarpur) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Jitendra Ojha For Respondent(s) : Mr. Urja Ram Kalbi, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL BENIWAL Order 06/08/2026 1. This application for bail has been filed by the petitioner under Section 483 of BNSS (old Section 439 of Cr. P. C. ). The requisite details of the matter are tabulated herein below: S. No. Particulars of the Case 1. FIR Number 91/2026 2. Date of lodging FIR 25. 05. 2026 3. Concerned Police Station Patiya 4. District Udaipur 5. Offences alleged in the FIR Sections 87, 127(4), 108 and 3(5) of BNS. 6. Offences added, if any 2.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case and false allegations have been levelled against him. The investigation has been concluded and challan has been filed. [2026:RJ-JP:37222] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-10231/2026] 2. 1 While referring to the challan, he further submits that only reason assigned by the investigating agency to connect the petitioner with the crime is that there was some telephonic conversation between the petitioner and the deceased wherein they had some dispute with regard to as to whether the petitioner should visit Bareja Temple. Apart from this conversation, there is no other material indicating any instigation at the behest of the petitioner which forced the deceased to take such drastic step. The petitioner was at Ahmedabad on the date of the incident. The petitioner is in judicial custody since 06. 06. 2026 and the trial will take sufficiently long time, therefore, he deserves to be enlarged on bail. 3.
Learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposes this bail application. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 5. Having considered the rival submissions, facts and circumstances of this case and after perusing the challan papers so also considering the facts that in the chargesheet, the reason assigned for committing suicide is only the dispute as to whether the petitioner should visit Bareja Temple or not; there is no other material prima facie to indicate any such instigation at the behest of the petitioner; the petitioner was at Ahmedabad on the date of the incident; and that the prosecution has not expressed any apprehension qua the petitioner fleeing away from justice, in case he is enlarged on bail, in the considered opinion of this Court, no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner behind [2026:RJ-JP:37222] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-10231/2026] the bars for an indefinite period as the trial will take sufficiently long time.
Thus, without expressing any opinion on merits/demerits of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the bail application filed by the petitioner deserves to be accepted. 6. Accordingly, the bail application filed under Section 483 of BNSS is allowed. It is ordered that petitioner- Praveen S/o Shree Prabhu, shall be released on bail in connection with the aforesaid FIR; provided he executes personal bond in the 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. 7. It is however, made clear that findings recorded/observations made above are for limited purposes of adjudication of bail application. The trial court shall not get prejudiced by the same. (SUNIL BENIWAL),J 52/Ajay Singh
Source: High Court of Rajasthan. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.