Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2026 DAILYLAW 5242 (RAJ)

RINKU KUMAR S/O SHRI RAMAKANT v. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CRLMB/15068/2025 · 2026-03-06

Sameer Jain

Transfer Petitionbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2026:RJ-JP:9716] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 15068/2025 Rinku Kumar S/o Shri Ramakant, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Nimoth, Police Station Khol, District Rewari (Haryana) (At Present Confined In Sub District Jail Behror). ----Applicant Versus The State of Rajasthan through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vinay Pal Yadav For Respondent(s) : Mr. Jitendra Singh Rathore, PP with Mr. Vinod Sharma Mr. Sapan Soni HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN Order 06/03/2026 1. The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 BNSS on behalf of accused-applicant. The accused-applicant was arrested in connection with FIR No. 17/2025 registered at Police Station Behror Sadar District Kotputli-Behror for the offence(s) under Section 103(1) of BNS, 2023. 2. Learned counsel for the accused-applicant has submitted that the applicant is sole bread earner of the family, aged about 35 years. It is further submitted that in the FIR the allegation was against few persons who have committed the offence and have inflicted injuries upon the victim. It is next submitted that there exist no direct eye witness in the instant matter and all the other witnesses are planted. It is also submitted that the recoveries effected qua the applicant are not carried out by following mandatory statutory provisions. It is further submitted that there exit no ulterior motive on the part of the applicant for commission of the said offence as alleged by the prosecution's story. It is [2026:RJ-JP:9716] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-15068/2025] further submitted that the applicant is behind bars for a period of approximately one year without any legal basis. It is further submitted that charge-sheet has already been filed and trial will take long time to conclude. In light of the above, it is prayed that the applicant should be released on bail. 3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the instant bail application and highlighted that recoveries were carried out namely motorcycle, mobile and the weapon from the house of the applicant indicating that the applicant has active role in commission of the said offence. It is further submitted that as per the post mortem report the cause of death is severe vital organ injury which has been inflicted by the applicant. 4. Having heard the arguments advanced by the counsel for the parties, considering that the applicant is sole bread earner of the family, aged about 35 years; that that there exist no direct eye witness in the instant matter; that the charge-sheet has already been filed; that the applicant is in custody for a period of approximately one year and looking to the overall facts and circumstances of the case and material on record but without commenting on merits/demerits of the case, this court is inclined to allow the bail application of the accused-applicant and enlarge him on bail. 5. 5. Accordingly, the bail application under Section 483 BNSS is allowed and it is ordered that accused-applicant Rinku Kumar S/o Shri Ramakant shall be enlarged on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of learned trial Judge for his [2026:RJ-JP:9716] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-15068/2025] appearance before the court concerned on all the dates of hearing as and when called upon to do so. (SAMEER JAIN),J JKP/s-145