Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2025 DAILYLAW 28972 (RAJ)

YUVRAJ S/O SHRI GYANSINGH v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CRLMB/11042/2025 · 2025-09-16

Praveer Bhatnagar

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2025:RJ-JP:37696] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 11042/2025 Yuvraj S/o Shri Gyansingh, Aged About 21 Years, R/o Gumanpura Tan Katkad, Police Station Sadar Hindaun, District Karauli (Raj.). (The Accused Petitioner Presently Confined In Sub Jail Hindaun City, District Karauli). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rahul Sharma, Ms. Chanchal for Mr. Rajneesh Gupta For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shree Ram Dhakar, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR Order 16/09/2025 1. The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 BNSS on behalf of accused-petitioner. The accused-petitioner has been arrested in connection with FIR No. 329/2025 registered at Police Station Hindon Sadar, District Karauli for the offences under Sections 189(2), 115(2), 126(2) and 109(1) of BNS. 2. Learned counsel for the accused-petitioner submits that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that the injury sustained by the injured- Devi Singh was simple blunt in nature. The allegations of using fire arm by the petitioner are incorrect. The petitioner is in custody since 26.08.2025 and there are no criminal antecedents against the accused-petitioner, therefore, the bail application of the accused- petitioner may be allowed. [2025:RJ-JP:37696] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-11042/2025] 3. Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application and submitted the factual report. The same is taken on record. 4. It is contended by learned Public Prosecutor that the petitioner used fire arm and attempted to cause murder of the injured Devi Singh, therefore, the bail application of the accused- petitioner may be dismissed. 5. Heard and perused the material available on record. 6. It is alleged against the petitioner that he used fire arm and from his possession, a illegal fire arm along with a cartridge was recovered, therefore, considering the above facts, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the accused-petitioner on bail. 7. Hence, the present criminal misc. bail application of the accused-petitioner is hereby dismissed. (PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J Keshav/164