VINOD KUMAR SUMAN S/O LAMICHAND v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN
CRLMB/788/2026 · 2026-04-08
Ganesh Ram Meena
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 1481 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 1481 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2026:RJ-JP:14579] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 788/2026 Vinod Kumar Suman S/o Lamichand, R/o Dholam Chauraha, Chhipabarod, District Baran, Rajasthan. (Presently Confined In Sub Jail Chhabra). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kuldeep Bhatia, Mr. Vipin Kumar, Mr. Bhavesh Lodha For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sriram Dhaka, P.P.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA
Order 08/04/2026
1. The instant bail application has been filed by the accused petitioner under Section 483 BNSS in connection with FIR No. 0249/2025 registered at Police Station Chhipabarod, District Baran for offences under Sections 103(1), 331(8) of BNS 2023.
2.
Learned counsel for the accused petitioners submits that the accused-petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case merely on the ground that he was having some conversation with other co-accused namely Raja Ali and Alam Ali. Learned counsel for the petition further submits that at the time of alleged incident the petitioner was in hospital at Chhipabarod as his wife was admitted for delivery.
3.
Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that accuse-petitioner is in custody since 07.08.2025 and police after
[2026:RJ-JP:14579] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-788/2026] completion of the investigation has submitted charge-sheet in the matter.
4. Learned Public prosecutor opposed the bail application and submits that the accused-petitioner was also along with the Raja Ali and Alam Ali on the motor bike and committed the offence.
5. Considered the submissions made by the counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Public Prosecutor and perused the challan papers.
6. It is not in dispute that the wife of the accused- petitioner was admitted in hospital as she was at the stage of deliver a child. The police has collected the CCTV footage of the place outside the hospital but could not show from the CCTV footage that accused went along with Raja Ali and Alam Ali whereas the details has been given in the charge-sheet shows that the petitioner after discussion with the co-accused Raja Ali and Alam Ali went back in the hospital.
7. Taking into consideration the overall facts and circumstances of the case and more particularly at the time of alleged incident wife of the accused-petitioner was admitted in the hospital and accused-petitioner was seen at the hospital in the CCTV footage, this Court without expressing any opinion on merits and demerits of the case, deems just and proper to enlarge the accused-petitioner on bail.
8. Accordingly, this bail application is allowed and it is
directed that accused-petitioner shall be released on bail provided that he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lac Only), together with two sureties in the sum of
[2026:RJ-JP:14579] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-788/2026] Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) to the satisfaction of the Trial Court with the stipulation that he shall appear before that Court or any Court to which the matter is transferred, on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.
(GANESH RAM MEENA),J SHRUTI SHARMA /25