Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2026 DAILYLAW 20720 (RAJ)

KAILASH CHAND MEENA S/O RAMNATH MEENA v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CRLMB/16490/2025 · 2026-01-19

Pramil Kumar Mathur

Transfer Petitionbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2026:RJ-JP:2252] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 16490/2025 Kailash Chand Meena S/o Ramnath Meena, Aged About 36 Years, R/o Village Gugali Ka Guwada, Police Station Thanagaji, District Alwar, Currently Working As Secretary, Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti, Dholpur (Rajasthan) (Presently Confined In District Jail, Sever, Bharatpur). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajneesh Gupta Mr. Fateh Ram Meena For Respondent(s) : Mr. Manvendra Singh Shekhawat, PP Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Sogarwal for Mr. Rajeev Kumar Sogarwal HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAMIL KUMAR MATHUR Order 19/01/2026 1. The petitioner has preferred this bail application under Section 483 of BNSS in FIR No.319/2025 registered at Police Station CPS Jaipur, ACB District for offence under Section 7 of P.C. Act, 2018. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Public Prosecutor 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 complainant has given information on 09.10.2025 but FIR has been lodged on 28.11.2025 after delay of one month. He again submits that though only fourty five thousand rupees have been [2026:RJ-JP:2252] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-16490/2025] allegedly recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner but petitioner is behind the bars since 28.11.2025 without any criminal past. The trial of the case will take considerable time, therefore, no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner in further custody and the bail application of the petitioner may be allowed. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application. 5. On consideration of the rival submissions and material available on record and in the 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 Kailash Chand Meena S/o Ramnath Meena, 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 Chandan/10