Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2025 DAILYLAW 48291 (RAJ)

MUBARIK SON OF AASU v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CRLMB/13471/2025 · 2025-11-06

Pramil Kumar Mathur

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2025:RJ-JP:44548] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 13471/2025 1. Mubarik Son Of Aasu, Aged About 45 Years, Resident Of Thalchana, Police Station Jurhara, District Deeg (Rajasthan) 2. Isak Son Of Ismail, Aged About 60 Years, Resident Of Thalchana, Police Station Jurhara, District Deeg (Rajasthan) (At Present Confined In District Jail, Deeg) ----Petitioners Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Girish Khandelwal For Respondent(s) For Complainant : : Mr. Jaiprakash Tiwari, PP Mr. Anoop Kumar HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAMIL KUMAR MATHUR Order 06/11/2025 1. The petitioners have preferred this bail application under Section 483 of BNSS in FIR No.14/2025 registered at Police Station Jurhara, District-Deeg for offences under Sections 189(2), 115(2), 126(2), 351(3) and 352 of BNS. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Public Prosecutor and counsel for the complainant and perused the material available on record. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. He further submitted that in relation to the same incident, the petitioner’s side had lodged an FIR against the complainant’s side prior to the filing of the present one. He further submitted that no specific act [2025:RJ-JP:44548] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-13471/2025] has been attributed to the present petitioner. It was also submitted that the injury sustained by the injured-Bashiri and Jamsheeda was on right wrist and on leg respectively. Petitioners are behind the bars since 27.09.2025 without any criminal past. The trial of the case may take considerable time, therefore, no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioners in further custody, hence, the bail application of the petitioners 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, but without expressing any opinion on the merits/demerits of the case, I am inclined to grant benefit of bail to the petitioners. 6. Accordingly, the bail application under Section 483 B.N.S.S. is allowed and it is ordered that the petitioners-Mubarik Son Of Aasu and Isak Son Of Ismail shall be released on bail on their 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 their appearance before that Court on all the dates till conclusion of the trial. (PRAMIL KUMAR MATHUR),J Arun/125