Rajasthan High Court – Jodhpur
Lakudi @ Laxmi vs State Of Rajasthan (2026:Rj-Jd:14183) on 25 March, 2026
Author: Kuldeep Mathur
Bench: Kuldeep Mathur
[2026:RJ-JD:14183]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 3rd Bail Application No. 6601/2024
Lakudi @ Laxmi W/o Late Kava, Aged About 65 Years, R/o
Rayna, P.s. Rishabhdeo, Distt Udaipur. (Presently Lodged At
Central Jail Udaipur)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through PP
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : -
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Narendra Gehlot, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR
ORDER
25/03/2026
1. This third application for bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has
been filed by the petitioner who has been arrested in connection
with F.I.R. No.99/2022 registered at Police Station Rishabdeo,
District Udaipur, for the offences under Sections 302, 201 and
120-B of IPC.
2. The second application for bail filed on behalf of the
petitioner was dismissed as not pressed vide order dated
23.01.2024 while directing the learned trial court to expedite the
trial pending against the present petitioner.
3. None appeared on behalf of the petitioner. The present bail
application has been filed on 10.05.2024. From a perusal of order
sheets of the case file, it appears that no one has appeared on
behalf of the petitioner since this application for bail has been
(Uploaded on 27/03/2026 at 04:33:12 PM)
(Downloaded on 31/03/2026 at 08:32:00 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14183] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-6601/2024]
filed. It seems that the petitioner has lost interest in pursuing the
present bail application.
4. This Court, vide order dated 04.02.2026, directed the
Registrar (Judicial) to call for status report of the trial pending
against the petitioner from the learned trial court. In compliance
of the order dated 04.02.2026 passed by this Court, a report
dated 25.02.2026 has been received and attached with the case
file. A perusal whereof indicates that the trial against the
petitioner is at the stage of evidence and out of total 26 cited
prosecution witnesses, statements of 22 prosecution witnesses
have been recorded before the learned trial court.
5. In the interest of Justice, this Court has carefully perused the
case file, record of the case and statements of the material
prosecution witnesses with the help of learned Public Prosecutor.
6. This Court, from a meticulous perusal of the case file and
statements of the witnesses recorded before the investigating
agency and learned trial court, finds that the petitioner has
hatched a criminal conspiracy with co-accused persons to abduct
the deceased Mst. ‘S’ with an intention of marrying her against her
will, intentionally murdering her and destroying the evidence of
murder. The petitioner has played a vital role in commission of the
offences by inducing and torturing the deceased into doing
something against her will. This Court also finds that the co-
accused Manilal has already been enlarged on bail by this Court
vide order dated 03.05.2023, however, the case of the present
petitioner is not at par with that of the co-accused Manilal who has
been enlarged on bail. In the opinion of this Court, as per the
(Uploaded on 27/03/2026 at 04:33:12 PM)
(Downloaded on 31/03/2026 at 08:32:00 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14183] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-6601/2024]
status report dated 25.02.2026 received from the learned
Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kherwada, District Udaipur,
the trial against the petitioner is at its fag end and is likely to
conclude shortly as out of total 26 cited prosecution witnesses,
statements of 22 witnesses have been recorded.
7. Therefore, looking to the seriousness of the allegations
levelled against the petitioner and gravity of offences committed
by the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner
on bail.
8. Accordingly, this third application for bail under Section 439
Cr.P.C. filed by the petitioner is dismissed.
(KULDEEP MATHUR),J
249-Divya/-
(Uploaded on 27/03/2026 at 04:33:12 PM)
(Downloaded on 31/03/2026 at 08:32:00 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
[ad_1]
Source link
