BALCHAND SAINI @ BALU SON OF SHRI CHHOTU RAM MALI v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN
CRLMB/863/2025 · 2025-06-16
Ganesh Ram Meena
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 3840 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 3840 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2025:RJ-JP:23267] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 863/2025 Balchand Saini Alias Balu Son Of Shri Chhotu Ram Mali, Aged About 31 Years, Resident Of Tibbawali Dhani, Village Watika, Tehsil Sanganer, District Jaipur (Rajasthan) ----Alleged-Accused-Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Public Prosecutor. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Saransh Saini For Respondent(s) : Mr. Manvendra Singh Shekhawat, P.P. Ms. Shazadi Bano for Mr. Ali Mohammed Khan HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA (V. J.) Order 16/06/2025
1. This anticipatory bail application has been filed by the accused petitioner under Section 482 B.N.S.S. in connection with FIR No. 464/2023 registered at Police Station Sanganer Sadar, District Jaipur City (South) for offence under Section 323, 341, 147 and 447 of IPC.
2. Heard and considered.
3. On perusal of case diary, allegations against the accused- petitioner is of active participation in the offence and causing injury to the complainant party. Though as per the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner there are general allegations against all the accused persons, but the anticipatory bail application of the father of the petitioner Chhotu Ram Mali was not extended by the Court. Against the order of rejection of his
[2025:RJ-JP:23267] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-863/2025] anticipatory bail application, Chhotu Ram Mali filed Special Leave to Appeal Criminal No.17203/2024 before the Hon’ble Apex Court which was dismissed vide order dated 01.04.2025. The case of the present accused-petitioner is no manner distinguishable from the case of the coaccused Chhotu Ram Mali who is father of the petitioner
4. Taking into consideration the overall facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is not inclined to extend the benefit of anticipatory bail to the accused-petitioner.
5. Accordingly, this anticipatory bail application is dismissed.
(GANESH RAM MEENA (V. J.)),J GAURAV/192