SHEESHRAM S/O SHRI KALYAN SINGH v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN
CRLMB/4770/2026 · 2026-03-30
Sangeeta Sharma
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 1082 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 1082 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2026:RJ-JP:13264] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 4770/2026 Sheeshram S/o Shri Kalyan Singh, R/o Tore Ka Saipur, Police Station Sone Ka Gurja, District Dholpur. (At Present Confined In District Jail, Dholpur). ----Accused-Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Anil Jain For Respondent(s) : Mr. Manvendra Singh Choudhary, PP HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SANGEETA SHARMA
Order 30/03/2026
1. This bail application has been filed on behalf of the accused- petitioner under Section 483 of BNSS in connection with FIR No. 440/2022 registered at P.S. Basedi, District Dholpur for the offence(s) under Section 384 IPC, in which charge-sheet has been submitted under Section 395 IPC and Section 11 of R.D.A. Act.
2.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case; charge-sheet has already been filed; He further submits that petitioner is behind the bars since 25.02.2026; similarly situated co-accused Rakesh S/o Fatteh, Sheeshram S/o Shri Madho Singh and Ramnaresh S/o Shri Madhosingh have been enlarged on bail by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, vide orders dated 07.10.2024, 14.03.2024 and 21.08.2023 in S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 12102/2024, 3095/2024 and 9689/2023 respectively; trial will
[2026:RJ-JP:13264] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-4770/2026] take its own time, so no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner behind the bars and, therefore, prays that the petitioner may be granted the benefit of bail under Section 483 of BNSS.
3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposes the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that there are three other criminal antecedents against the accused-petitioner.
4.
Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that in three cases instituted against the petitioner, two cases have already been disposed of and in one case, he is on bail.
5. Taking into consideration the overall facts and circumstances of the case; the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner and considering the fact that charge-sheet has already been filed; petitioner is behind the bars since 25.02.2026; similarly situated co-accused Rakesh S/o Fatteh, Sheeshram S/o Shri Madho Singh and Ramnaresh S/o Shri Madhosingh have been enlarged on bail by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court; trial will take its own time. Hence, this Court without expressing any opinion on the merits/demerits of the case, deems it just and proper to enlarge the petitioner on bail.
6. Therefore, this bail application under Section 483 BNSS is accordingly, allowed and the accused-petitioner Sheeshram S/o Shri Kalyan Singh is ordered to be released on bail, provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- with two sureties of Rs. 50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the trial Court, with the stipulation that he shall appear before that Court and any
[2026:RJ-JP:13264] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-4770/2026] court to which the matter is transferred, on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.
7. It is made clear that the accused-petitioner shall not involve in any other offence(s) during currency of the bail and he shall mark his presence once in a month in the concerned police station.
8. In case of any breach of the aforementioned conditions, the learned Public Prosecutor shall be free to move the application against the accused-petitioner for cancellation of the bail before the concerned Court.
9. The observation made hereinabove is only for decision of the instant bail application and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner.
10. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the concerned trial Court through e-mail/fax, for necessary compliance.
(SANGEETA SHARMA),J SHIVANI/30