Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2025 DAILYLAW 41006 (RAJ)

HANSRAJ S/O RAMPRASAD v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CRLAS/2101/2025 · 2025-10-10

Pramil Kumar Mathur

Criminal Appealbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2025:RJ-JP:41348] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Appeal (Sb) No. 2101/2025 Hansraj S/o Ramprasad, Aged About 50 Years, R/o Bindarada Police Station Chhabra, District Baran (Rajasthan) (Presently Lodged In Sub Jail At Chhabra) ----Appellant Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor 2. Vinod S/o Gangaram Koli, Aged About 23 Years, R/o Nipaniya Police Station Chhabra District Baran (Rajasthan) ----Respondents For Appellant(s) : Mr. K.N. Sharma Mr. Avadhesh Meena For Respondent(s) For Complainant : : Mr. Devi Singh, PP Mr. Amit Moondia HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAMIL KUMAR MATHUR Order 10/10/2025 1. The petitioner has preferred this second bail application under Section 483 of BNSS in FIR No.244/2024 registered at Police Station Chhabra, District-Baran for offences under Sections 308, 394, 504, 34 of IPC and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(v) and 3(2)(va) of SC/ST (POA) Act, 1989. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Public Prosecutor and counsel for the complainant and perused the material available on record. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that as per the prosecution, the injury caused to the injured-Prince on the [2025:RJ-JP:41348] (2 of 2) [CRLAS-2101/2025] head is dangerous to life, which is attributed to the other co- accused-Shambhu Dhakar. He submits that no specific role has been assigned to the present petitioner-Hansraj. Petitioner is behind the bars since 19.03.2025 without any criminal history. The trial of the case may take considerable time, therefore, no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner in further custody, hence, the bail application of the petitioner may be allowed. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor and counsel for the complainant have vehemently opposed the bail application. 5. On consideration of the rival submission and material available on record and deliberating all the facts and circumstances of the case, and without expressing any opinion on the merits/demerits of the case, I am inclined to grant benefit of bail to the petitioner. 6. Accordingly, the second bail application under Section 483 B.N.S.S. is allowed and it is ordered that the petitioner-Hansraj S/o Ramprasad shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court for his appearance before that Court on all the dates till conclusion of the trial. (PRAMIL KUMAR MATHUR),J Arun/7