Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2026 DAILYLAW 1877 (RAJ)

JEEVRAJ S/O MANGU v. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN,

CRLMB/4833/2026 · 2026-04-09

Pramil Kumar Mathur

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2026:RJ-JP:14900] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 4833/2026 Jeevraj S/o Mangu, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Naagelav, Police Station Pisangan, District Ajmer (At Present Confined In Central Jail, Ajmer). ----Petitioner Versus The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Public Prosecutor. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Aayush Agarwal For Respondent(s) For Complainant : : Mr. Vivek Sharma, PP Mr. G.K. Sharma HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAMIL KUMAR MATHUR Order 09/04/2026 1. The petitioner has filed this bail application under Section 483 of BNSS in FIR No.15/2026 registered at Police Station Pisangan, District Ajmer for offences under Sections 115(2), 126(2) and 3(5) of BNS, 2023. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Public Prosecutor and counsel for the complainant and perused the material available on record. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that a cross-case in the present matter was lodged by the petitioner against the complainant, in which the complainant has been charge-sheeted. Though the injury report of the complainant was prepared on the same day but the medical opinion regarding the alleged life-threatening injury was obtained on 13.03.2026, after [2026:RJ-JP:14900] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-4833/2026] an unexplained delay of one and a half months which casts serious doubts on nature of injury. The petitioner has been in custody since 15.03.2026. 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 and counsel for the complainant have 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 the petitioner Jeevraj S/o Mangu, 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. (PRAMIL KUMAR MATHUR),J Arun/33