Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2026 DAILYLAW 15911 (RAJ)

CHETRAM @ PAPPU SON OF LATE SHRI JAGANLAL v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CRLMB/1138/2026 · 2026-01-30

Sameer Jain

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2026:RJ-JP:4408] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 2nd Bail Application No. 1138/2026 Chetram @ Pappu Son Of Late Shri Jaganlal, Aged About 43 Years, Resident Of Village Gangwana, Police Station Balahedi, District Dausa (Raj.) (The Accused Petitioner Presently Confined In Sub Jail Kolana Bandikui) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajneesh Gupta with Mr. Rahul Sonal Ms. Chanchal For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rhishi Raj Singh Rathore, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN Order 30/01/2026 1. The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 BNSS on behalf of accused-applicant. The accused-applicant was arrested in connection with FIR No. 133/2025 registered at Police Station Mehandipur Balaji District Dausa for the offence(s) under Sections 189(2), 115(2), 126(2), 3(5), 333 & 109(1) of BNS, 2023 and Sections 3/25 & 5/25 of Arms Act. 2. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that statements of concerned doctors as well as complainant have been recorded. It is submitted that there is change in circumstances and that the applicant is in custody since September, 2025. It is submitted that applicant was not named in the FIR and final opinion of the concerned doctors qua the injuries are similar in nature. It is submitted that co-accused have been [2026:RJ-JP:4408] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-1138/2026] enlarged on bail. It is apprised that the prohibition order was passed qua both the parties in altercations. 3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the instant bail application. 4. Heard and considered. 5. Considering the overall facts and taking note of the fact that the statements recorded of concerned doctors and complainant are change in circumstances; that the applicant is in custody since September, 2025; that applicant was not named in the FIR and final opinion of the concerned doctors qua the injuries are similar in nature; that co-accused have been enlarge on bail but without commenting upon the merits/demerits of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the accused-applicant on bail. 6. Accordingly, the bail application under Section 483 BNSS is allowed and it is ordered that accused-applicant Chetram @ Pappu Son Of Late Shri Jaganlal shall be enlarged on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of learned trial Judge for his appearance before the court concerned on all the dates of hearing as and when called upon to do so. (SAMEER JAIN),J DEEPAK /s-190