Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2026 DAILYLAW 16037 (RAJ)

ARBAJ S/O LAT SHABBIR v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CRLMB/1206/2026 · 2026-01-31

Ganesh Ram Meena

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2026:RJ-JP:4613] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 2nd Bail Application No. 1206/2026 1. Arbaj S/o Lat Shabbir, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Kharkhadi, Police Station Sikari, District Deeg. (Raj.) (At Present In Sub Jail Deeg). 2. Sahud S/o Saharudeen @ Saharudeen, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Kharkhadi, Police Station Sikari, District Deeg. (Raj.) (At Present In Sub Jail Deeg). 3. Rafeek @ Mustkeem @ Polard S/o Hameeda, Aged About 19 Years, R/o Kharkhadi, Police Station Sikari, District Deeg. (Raj.) (At Present In Sub Jail Deeg). ----Petitioners Versus State of Rajasthan, through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ganesh Dutt Gauttam Mr. Rahul Khan Mr. Soharab Khan For Respondent(s) : Mr. Tapesh Agarwal, Public Prosecutor HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA Order 31/01/2026 1. This 2nd bail application has been filed by the petitioners under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with FIR No.368/2025 registered at Police Station Sikri, District Deeg for offences under Sections 319(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 317(2), 317(4), 317(5), 303(2), 313 & 61(2) of BNS, 2023 and Section 66D Information Technology (Amended) Act, 2008. 2. First bail application filed by the petitioners bearing S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.15389/2025 was dismissed as [2026:RJ-JP:4613] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-1206/2026] withdraw vide order dated 08.01.2026 with liberty to file fresh a fresh bail application after filing of the challan. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the accused- petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case and they are in custody since 17.10.2025. Learned counsel further submits that the Police after completion of investigation has already submitted charge-sheet in the matter and the accused-petitioners is no more required for any kind of interrogation or recovery. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the bail application. 5. Considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned Public Prosecutor and also perused the material made available on record. 6. Having regard to the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioners and so also the fact that the Police after completion of investigation has already submitted charge-sheet in the matter, this Court without expressing any opinion on merits or demerits of the case, deems just and proper to enlarge the petitioners on bail. 7. Accordingly, the 2nd bail application is allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioners named above 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 or any Court to which the [2026:RJ-JP:4613] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-1206/2026] matter is transferred, on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so. 8. If the accused-petitioners are found involved in any criminal case of similar nature in future then the prosecution would be at liberty to make an application for cancellation of the bail application before this Court. (GANESH RAM MEENA),J Ashish Kumar /13