PRINCE SHARMA S/O SHRI HARIOM SHARMA v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN
CRLAS/2715/2025 · 2026-03-28
Anoop Kumar Dhand
Criminal Appealbody2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 5745 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 5745 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2026:RJ-JP:13095] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 2715/2025 Prince Sharma S/o Shri Hariom Sharma, Aged About 18 Years 08 Months, R/o- Near Kabir Ashram, Aanwali, Nayagaon, P.S. R.K. Puram. (At Present Confined In Central Jail Kota) ----Accused/Appellant Versus
1. State of Rajasthan, through Public Prosecutor.
2. Aakash S/o Shri Bablu Bairwa, R/o- Devnarayan Mandir Ki Gali, Aanwali, P.S. R.K. Puram, District Kota City (Raj.). ----Respondents For Appellant(s) : Mr. Harbhan Singh for Mr. Samarth Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vivek Choudhary, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 28/03/2026
1. Counsel for the appellant submits that he has been falsely implicated in the instant case and he is in custody since
25.04.2025. Counsel further submits that after investigation, charge-sheet has been submitted against the appellant and the trial will take its own time to conclude, therefore, indulgence of bail be granted to the appellant.
2. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposes the prayer and submits that as per the statements of the injured-Sitaram, the appellant has inflicted several knife blows on his person and injury No. 1 was found to be dangerous to life and other injuries sustained by him are lacerated wounds. Looking to the gravity of the matter and nature of allegations levelled against the appellant,
[2026:RJ-JP:13095] (2 of 2) [CRLAS-2715/2025] the appellant does not deserve any indulgence of bail by this Court.
3. Heard and considered the submissions made at Bar and perused the material available on record.
4. Considering the arguments put forward by the learned Public Prosecutor and looking to the fact that several knife blows have been inflicted by the appellant on the person of the injured- Sitaram, after which injury No. 1 has been found to be grievous in nature and dangerous to life, hence, looking to the gravity of the matter and nature of allegations levelled against the appellant, this Court does not deem it just and proper to entertain the instant criminal appeal at this stage and the same is rejected granting liberty to the petitioner to renew his prayer of bail, after recording the statements of the injured-Sitaram as well as the treating Doctor/Doctor who has prepared the medico legal report of the injured-Sitaram.
(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Shivam-Puneet/14