[2026:RJ-JP:37452] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 9925/2026 CNR: RJHC010739292026 | URN: CRLMB / 21714U / 2026 Tikuram Suda @ Arjun Ram S/o Raj Kumar, Aged About 30 Years, R/o - Ward No. 15,kasba - Rawatsar, Hanumangarh (Raj). (Presently Lodged At Sub Jail - Nohar) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Varsha Goyal Mr. Bhagirath Solanki For Respondent(s) : Mr. Hanuman Prajapati, PP Mr. Tirupati Chandra HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BALJINDER SINGH SANDHU Order 06/08/2026 Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. The petitioner has been arrested in connection with FIR No.303/2026 registered at Police Station Rawatsar, District Hanumangarh for the offence punishable under Section 108 of the BNS. He has preferred the present bail application under Section 483 of the BNSS. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is an Advocate and the deceased was working as a typist in his chamber. It is submitted that a dispute arose between them regarding a typewriter and, being aggrieved by the same, the deceased allegedly committed suicide. It is contended that even a [2026:RJ-JP:37452] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-9925/2026] bare reading of the FIR does not disclose any act of instigation or intentional aid attributable to the petitioner so as to constitute an offence under Section 108 of the BNS. It is further submitted that the prosecution case is primarily founded on a message allegedly sent by the petitioner to the wife of the deceased, which, by itself, does not indicate any instigation on the part of the petitioner. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 23.06.2026, has no criminal antecedents, and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor as well as learned counsel for the complainant have vehemently opposed the bail application. Learned Public Prosecutor, while producing the case diary, submits that the allegations made in the FIR and the material collected during investigation clearly make out a prima facie case against the petitioner. This Court finds that the case is primarily based upon the message that was allegedly sent by the deceased, prima facie, the message as well as the FIR prima facie do not disclose any instigation on the part of the petitioner. Whether, the material on record would be sufficient to convict the petitioner under Section 108 of BNS is to be considered during the course of trial. The petitioner is in judicial custody since 23.06.2026 and his criminal antecedents are clear. Hence, keeping in view the fact that the conclusion of the trial is likely to take time and the prosecution has not shown any apprehension that the petitioner would flee from justice or misuse [2026:RJ-JP:37452] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-9925/2026] the liberty of bail, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court deems it just and proper to enlarge the petitioner on bail under Section 483 of the BNSS. Accordingly, the bail application filed under Section 483 of the BNSS is allowed. It is directed that the petitioner, Tikuram Suda @ Arjun Ram S/o Raj Kumar, shall be released on bail in connection with the aforesaid FIR, if not wanted in any other case, provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- along with two sound and solvent sureties of Rs.25,000/- each, to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court, for his appearance before the said Court on each and every date of hearing and whenever called upon to do so till the conclusion of the trial. (BALJINDER SINGH SANDHU),J 94/Deepak