RADHARAMAN SON OF SHRI HARSWAROOP v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN
CRLMB/3810/2026 · 2026-03-24
Pramil Kumar Mathur
Transfer Petitionbody2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 5951 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 5951 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2026:RJ-JP:12296] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 3810/2026 Radharaman Son Of Shri Harswaroop, Aged About 29 Years, Resident Of Mahmadpur, Police Station Balghat, District Karauli. (Accused Is Confined In Sub Jail Bayana District Bharatpur) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Thorugh Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Krishna Singh For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sudesh Kumar Saini, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAMIL KUMAR MATHUR
Order 24/03/2026
1. The petitioner has preferred this bail application under Section 483 of BNSS in FIR No.135/2014 registered at Police Station Roopwas, District-Bharatpur for offences under Section 382 of IPC.
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 when the petitioner failed to appear before the learned Trial Court on 21.01.2017, his bail bonds were forfeited and arrest warrant was issued against him. Thereafter, the accused-petitioner was arrested on 16.02.2026 in pursuance of arrest warrant and has remained in judicial custody since then. In the last nine years, the petitioner could not appear before the Trial Court because he was
[2026:RJ-JP:12296] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-3810/2026] out of the State for his livelihood, which constitutes a bona fide reason for his non-appearance on the scheduled dates. The trial of the case may take considerable time, therefore, no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner in further custody, hence, 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 submission and material available on record and deliberating all the facts and circumstances of the case, but without expressing any opinion on the merits/demerits of the case, I am inclined to grant benefit of bail to the petitioner.
6. Accordingly, the bail application under Section 483 B.N.S.S. is allowed and it is ordered that the petitioner-Radharaman Son Of Shri Harswaroop shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court for his appearance before that Court on all the dates till conclusion of the trial.
(PRAMIL KUMAR MATHUR),J Arun/72