MAHESH KUMAR S/O HARISHCHANDRA @ HARIYA v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN
CRLMB/15888/2025 · 2026-06-29
Pramil Kumar Mathur
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 2078 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 2078 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 15888/2025 Mahesh Kumar S/o Harishchandra @ Hariya, Aged About 36 Years, R/o Manpura, Pipadham, Jhalawar, Police Station Kotwali, Jhalawar District Jhalawar (Raj.) (At Present Accused Petitioner Confined In District Jail Jhalawar). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Jitendra Jain Mr. Saurabh Singh For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vijay Singh Yadav, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAMIL KUMAR MATHUR
Order 29/06/2026
1. The petitioner has preferred this bail application under Section 483 of BNSS in FIR No.790/2024 registered at Police Station Kotwali Jhalawar, District Jhalawar for offences under Sections 109(1), 115(2), 126(2) and 352 of BNS, 2023.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Public Prosecutor and perused the material available on record.
3.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that in the present case during the course of trial, the complainant-Hariram and his wife-Ganeshibai both have turned hostile. It is contended that from a perusal of the statement of PW-4 Anita, the wife of the deceased, it is evident that though she has supported the prosecution case in examination in chief however, her testimony
(2 of 2) [CRLMB-15888/2025] clearly establishes that she is not an eyewitness to the alleged incident. It is further submitted that the other material witnesses namely PW-5 Dinesh and PW-6 Lakhan, have not supported the prosecution case and both have turned hostile. There is not an iota of incriminating evidence available against the present petitioner. Petitioner is behind the bars since 15.12.2024 without any criminal past. The trial of the case will take considerable time, therefore, no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner in further custody, consequently, the bail application of the petitioner may be allowed.
4. Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application.
5. On consideration of the rival submissions and material available on record and in light of submission made on behalf of petitioner but without expressing any opinion on merits/demerits of the case, I am inclined to grant benefit of bail to the petitioner.
6. Consequently, the bail application under Section 483 B.N.S.S. is allowed and it is directed that the petitioner Mahesh Kumar S/o Harishchandra @ Hariya, be released on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court with the stipulation that he shall appear before that Court on all subsequent dates of hearing till conclusion of the trial.
(PRAMIL KUMAR MATHUR),J 11/Chandan