Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2026 DAILYLAW 11991 (RAJ)

MANOJ S/O RAJU v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CRLMB/12078/2026 · 2026-08-03

Pramil Kumar Mathur

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2026:RJ-JP:29983] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 12078/2026 CNR: RJHC020736212026 | URN: CRLMB / 22197U / 2026 Manoj S/o Raju, R/o Barda Basti, Karni Nagar, Asha Meena Parshad Ke Makaan Ke Pass, P.s. Nanta, Kota City. (Accused At Present Confined In Central Jail, Kota). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Samarth Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Jaiprakash Tiwari, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAMIL KUMAR MATHUR Order 03/08/2026 1. The petitioner has filed this bail application under Section 483 of BNSS in FIR No.170/2026 registered at Police Station Nanta, District Kota City for offences under Sections 4 and 25 of Arms Act, 1959. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Public Prosecutor and perused the material available on record. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. He submits that the allegation levelled against the present petitioner is that a sharp-edged knife was recovered from his conscious possession without having any valid licence or permit for possessing the same. Petitioner is behind the bars since 28.06.2026 though 18 cases have been reported against him and in 5 cases he got the order of acquittal, however, in remaining cases he is already bailed [2026:RJ-JP:29983] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-12078/2026] out. Most of the cases are related to Arms Act and Excise Act. The matter is exclusively triable by the Magistrate. Charge-sheet has already been filed. The trial of the case will take considerable time, therefore, no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner in further custody, consequently, the bail application deserves to be allowed. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application. 5. On consideration of the rival submissions and material available on record and in light of submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner but without expressing any opinion on merits/demerits of the case, I am inclined to grant benefit of bail to the petitioner. 6. Consequently, the bail application under Section 483 B.N.S.S. is allowed and it is directed that petitioner Manoj S/o Raju, be released on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court with the stipulation that he shall appear before that Court on all subsequent dates of hearing till conclusion of the trial with following further conditions:- (i) that the petitioner shall mark his presence before the SHO, Police Station Nanta, District Kota City in every 15 days of each month till conclusion of trial. (ii) The concerned SHO is directed to maintain a register for this purpose. In case, the petitioner fails to mark his presence in the concerned Police Station as directed above, the concerned SHO is [2026:RJ-JP:29983] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-12078/2026] directed to immediately report the matter to trial court in this regard. (iii) The petitioner shall not repeat any offence in future. (iv) If breach of any of the directions is reported or come to the notice of the trial court the same shall alone be a reason for learned Public Prosecutor to apply for cancellation of bail and trial court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail. (PRAMIL KUMAR MATHUR),J Chandan/73