Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2026 DAILYLAW 784 (RAJ)

RAMJILAL S/O BANSHILAL v. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CRLMB/2720/2026 · 2026-02-27

Sandeep Taneja

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2026:RJ-JP:9253] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 2720/2026 1. Ramjilal S/o Banshilal, Aged About 44 Years, R/o Dharanavad, Police Station, Ramganjmandi, District Kota (Rajasthan) (Presently Confined In Sub Jail, Ramganj- mandi) 2. Mahaveer S/o Ramjilal, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Dharanavad, Police Station, Ramganjmandi, District Kota (Rajasthan) (Presently Confined In Sub Jail, Ramganjmandi) 3. Hema @ Hemraj S/o Devilal, Aged About 47 Years, R/o Dharanavad, Police Station, Ramganjmandi, District Kota (Rajasthan) (Presently Confined In Sub Jail, Ramganjmandi) ----Petitioners Versus The State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Dinesh Kumar Garg For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vivek Sharma, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP TANEJA Order 27/02/2026 1. The present bail application has been filed by the accused- petitioners under Section 483 of BNSS in connection with FIR No.421/2025 registered at Police Station Ramganjmandi, District Kota Rural, for the offence(s) punishable under Section(s) 115(2), 126(2), 117(2), 109(1) and 3(5) of BNS. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the accused- petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case and they have nothing to do with the alleged offences. Learned counsel further submits that the specific allegation with regard to inflicting grievous injury on the head of the injured person, has been [2026:RJ-JP:9253] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-2720/2026] attributed to the co-accused, Deepak and the allegations levelled against the petitioners are omnibus in nature. He also submits that petitioners have no criminal antecedents, they are in custody since long, no recovery is required to be made from them and trial will take considerably long time in its conclusion, so no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioners into custody, therefore, they may be enlarged on bail. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioners hereinabove. 4. Taking into consideration the overall facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioners, the fact that petitioners have no criminal antecedents and trial will take considerably long time in its conclusion, thus, without commenting anything on the merits / demerits of the case, this Court deems it just and proper to enlarge the petitioners on bail. 5. Therefore, the instant bail application is allowed and the accused-petitioners, namely (1) Ramjilal S/O Banshilal (2) Mahaveer S/O Ramjilal (3) Hema @ Hemraj S/O Devilal, are ordered to be released on bail, provided, each of them furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the trial Court, with the stipulation that the petitioners shall appear before that Court on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so. (SANDEEP TANEJA),J AVINASH GULERIA /104