Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2026 DAILYLAW 15797 (RAJ)

MUKESH URF MUKLA S/O SHRI LAXMANDAS v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CRLMB/1001/2026 · 2026-01-29

Ganesh Ram Meena

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2026:RJ-JP:4164] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 1001/2026 1. Mukesh Urf Mukla S/o Shri Laxmandas, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Botaj, Surendar Nagar Gujraj, Presently Khanabadosh Ward No. 12, Railway Station Ke Pass Puliya Thana Khairhtal-Tijara, District Khairthal-Tijara (Raj.) (Presently In Central Jail Alwar, Rajasthan). 2. Manoj @ Maniya S/o Pitambar, Aged About 21 Years, R/o Khanabadosh, Hisar Railway Station Ke Pass, Ramsinghpura Phatak Nai, Aabadi Police Station Rewadi, District Rewadi (Haryana) (Presently In Central Jail Alwar, Rajasthan). 3. Rakesh @ Dhakla S/o Shri Prakash, Aged About 19 Years, R/o Khanabadosh, Hisar Railway Station Ke Pass, Ramsinghpura Phatak Nai, Aabadi Police Station Rewadi, District Rewadi (Haryana) (Presently In Central Jail Alwar, Rajasthan). ----Petitioners Versus State of Rajasthan, through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Rashmi Khandelwal For Respondent(s) : Mr. Amit Kumar Gupta, Public Prosecutor HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA Order 29/01/2026 1. Petitioners have filed this bail application under Section 483 B.N.S.S., arising out of F.I.R. No.410/2025 registered with the Police Station N.E.B., District Alwar for offence under Section 303(2) of BNS, 2023. 2. Counsel for the petitioners submits that the accused- petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. As per the F.I.R., the allegation is of theft of a Scooty against unknown persons. He further submits that the accused-petitioners are in [2026:RJ-JP:4164] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-1001/2026] custody since 05.01.2026 and nothing has to be recovered from them. He also submits that the trial of the case is likely to take considerable time to conclude, therefore, the accused-petitioners may be enlarged on bail. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application. 4. Considered the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Public Prosecutor. 5. Taking into consideration the submissions made by counsel for the petitioners and so also the fact that the accused petitioners are in custody since 05.01.2026, this Court without expressing any opinion on the merits and demerits of the case, deems just and proper to enlarge the petitioners on bail. 6. This bail application is, accordingly, allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioners shall be released on bail provided each of them furnish a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lac only) together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) each to the satisfaction of the trial Court with the stipulation that they shall appear before that Court and any Court to which the matter be transferred, on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so. (GANESH RAM MEENA),J Ashish Kumar /114