ROHITASH ALIAS SUBHASH S/O TARACHAND v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN
CRLMB/17081/2025 · 2026-02-10
Sandeep Taneja
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 21088 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 21088 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2026:RJ-JP:6152] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 17081/2025 Rohitash Alias Subhash S/o Tarachand, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Rinu, Police Station Balara, District Sikar. (The Accused Petitioner is in Judicial Custody in District Jail, Sikar) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sumit Kumar Jain with Ms. Diksha Meena For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vivek Sharma, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP TANEJA
Order 10/02/2026
1. This bail application has been filed by the accused-petitioner under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. in connection with FIR No.155/2025 registered at Police Station Balara, District Sikar, for the offence(s) punishable under Section(s) 189(2), 115(2), 329(3), 352, 110 & 117(2) B.N.S.
2.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the accused- petitioner, who is an innocent person, has been falsely implicated in this case and he has nothing to do with the alleged offences.
Learned counsel further submits that the other co-accused persons have already been enlarged on bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 17.12.2025 in S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.16300/2025 (Tarachand & Ors. v. State of Rajasthan). Learned counsel also submits that though,
[2026:RJ-JP:6152] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-17081/2025] some of the injuries sustained by the injured persons are grievous in nature, however, the same are not dangerous to life. Learned counsel further submits that there exists a cross FIR in the matter; the petitioner has no criminal antecedent; he is in custody since 19.11.2025 and charge-sheet has already been filed in the matter. Learned counsel further submits that no recovery is required to be made from the petitioner and trial will considerably take long time in its conclusion, so no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner in custody, therefore, the benefit of bail under Section 483 B.N.S.S. may be granted to the accused- petitioner.
3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposes the
submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner hereinabove.
4. Taking into consideration the overall facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for both the parties, the fact that the injuries sustained by injured persons are not dangerous to life, charge-sheet has already been filed, the other co-accused persons have already been granted bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, thus, without commenting anything on the merits / demerits of the case, this Court deems it just and proper to enlarge the petitioner on bail.
5. Therefore, the bail application under Section 483 B.N.S.S. is allowed and the accused-petitioner, namely Rohitash Alias Subhash S/o Tarachand, is ordered to be released on bail, provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/-
[2026:RJ-JP:6152] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-17081/2025] with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the Trial Court, with the stipulation that the petitioner shall appear before that Court on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when he is called upon to do so.
(SANDEEP TANEJA),J SAHIL SONI /24