Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2025 DAILYLAW 3860 (RAJ)

TARIF SON OF SHAHID v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CRLMB/867/2025 · 2025-03-03

Ganesh Ram Meena

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2025:RJ-JP:9015] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 867/2025 Tarif Son Of Shahid, Aged About 27 Years, Resident Of Village Ladlaka, Police Station Jurhara, District Deeg ( At Present Accused Petitioner Confined In Sub Jail Deeg) ----Petitioner Versus State of Rajasthan, through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Arvind Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Amit Punia, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA Order 03/03/2025 1. This bail application is filed by the accused petitioner u/S 483 BNSS in connection with FIR No. 134/2024 registered at Police Station Jurhara, District Deeg for offences u/S 143, 323, 341 & 506 IPC. 2. Heard. 3. Considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the accused petitioner. 4. The allegation against the accused petitioner is that he inflicted sharp weapon injury to Rukmin. On perusal of the injury report of the injured Rukmin, this Court finds that all the injuries are by blunt weapon and not by sharp. Only one injury sustained by the injured Rukmin has been opined to be grievous in nature whereas there are allegations against various persons of causing the injuries. [2025:RJ-JP:9015] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-867/2025] 5. The co-accused Najar @ Najir has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 21.10.2024 and in view of the averments made in the first information report, the case of the present accused petitioner is in no manner distinguishable from the case of the co-accused Najar @ Najir, who has been already enlarged on bail. 6. Taking into consideration the allegations against the accused petitioner and the injuries sustained by the injured Rukmin and more particularly the fact that co-accused has already been enlarged on bail, this Court without expressing any opinion on merits or demerits of the case, deems just and proper to enlarge the petitioner on bail. 7. Accordingly, this bail application is allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner shall be released on bail provided that he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lac Only), together with two sureties in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) to the satisfaction of the Trial Court with the stipulation that he shall appear before that Court or any Court to which the matter is transferred, on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so. (GANESH RAM MEENA),J GAURAV SRIVASTAVA /12