CHATURBHUJ S/O BHAGWANARAM v. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN
CRLMB/15496/2025 · 2026-01-13
Anil Kumar Upman
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 20004 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 20004 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2026:RJ-JP:1412] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 15496/2025 Chaturbhuj S/o Bhagwanaram, Aged About 50 Years, R/o Village Indpura, Kochhor, Tehsil Dataramgarh, District Sikar (Raj.). (At Present Confined In District Jail, Sikar). ----Petitioner Versus The State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Anshuman Saxena Mr. Gaurav Meena Mr. Vishal Gurjar For Respondent(s) : Mr. Amit Punia, PP Mr. Vikram Singh, for complainant HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 13/01/2026
1. This bail application has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS, on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.143/2025 registered at Police Station Jeenmata, District Sikar for offences punishable under Sections 103(1), 115(2), 126(2), 351(2), 351(3), 333 & 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (in short, ‘BNS’), 2023. After completion of investigation, police filed charge-sheet in this matter for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1) & 126(2) of BNS. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. It is contended that alleged incident took place in the spur of moment and there was no intention of the petitioner to cause fatal injury. It is contended that as per post-mortem report, cause of death of
[2026:RJ-JP:1412] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-15496/2025] deceased is shock due to Ischemia heart disease (Myocardial Infarction). It has also been opined by medical expert that injury sustained to injured was not sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of nature. It is submitted that charge-sheet has been filed and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. It is argued that petitioner is in custody since 08.08.2025 and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor assisted by learned counsel for the complainant vehemently opposes the prayer for bail made by learned counsel for the petitioner. Learned counsel for the complainant submits that petitioner is previously convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 447, 435 & 323 of IPC. 4. Heard. Perused the material available on record. 5.
Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances and considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties as well as considering the material available on record in the form of charge-sheet, especially the post-mortem report and the manner in which the alleged incident took place; trial will take considerable time in its conclusion as well as looking to the custody period, but without expressing any opinion on merits/demerits of this case, I deem it proper to allow the bail application. 6. This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner - Chaturbhuj S/o Bhagwanaram, shall be released on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) together with two
[2026:RJ-JP:1412] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-15496/2025] sureties in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court with the stipulation that he shall appear before that Court and any court to which the matter is transferred, on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so. 7. The observations made hereinabove are only for decision of the bail application and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J CHARU SONI /35