MAYARAM S/O SHRI GHISARAM GURJAR v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN
CRLMB/15983/2025 · 2026-01-21
Ganesh Ram Meena
Transfer Petitionbody2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 20244 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 20244 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2026:RJ-JP:2803] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 15983/2025 Mayaram S/o Shri Ghisaram Gurjar, R/o Dhani Todawali, Tehsil Kotputli, District Kotputli Behror, Raj. ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Raj Kumar Kasana For Respondent(s) : Mr. Amit Kumar Gupta, P.P.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA Order 21/01/2026
1. This anticipatory bail application has been filed by the accused-petitioners under Section 482 BNSS in connection with FIR No. 495/2025, registered with the Police Station, Kotputali, District Kotputli-Behror for offences punishable under Sections 189(2), 115(2), 126(2), 351(2), 303(2) and 329(3) of BNS, 2023.
2. Heard.
3. Considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the accused-petitioner as well as the learned Public Prosecutor and also learned counsel for the complainant and perused the case diary.
4. From perusal of the case diary it is revealed that five persons from the complainant side have sustained injuries in the alleged incident. Injured Smt. Kailashi Devi has sustained 13
[2026:RJ-JP:2803] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-15983/2025] injuries, Smt. Manju Devi has sustained 4 injuries, Smt. Prem Devi has sustained 4 injuries, Smt. Vimla Devi has sustained 5 injuries and Smt. Ankita @ Panchi has sustained 8 injuries. In all, 34 injuries have been inflicted by the accused-petitioner to the injured complainant party. It is also revealed that all the injured persons are females, meaning thereby the accused-petitioner attacked the females.
5. From perusal of the contents of the FIR, the present accused-petitioner is found to be involved in the alleged incident.
6. Taking into considering the overall facts and circumstances the case and more particularly the number of injuries inflicted by the present accused-petitioner, this Court is not inclined to extend the benefit of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
7. Accordingly, this anticipatory bail application is dismissed.
(GANESH RAM MEENA),J SHRUTI SHARMA /212