ALFEJ AHMED S/O SHRI ABDUL HAMEED @ MUNNA v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN
CRLMB/6198/2026 · 2026-05-20
Sangeeta Sharma
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 8330 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 8330 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2026:RJ-JP:21276] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 6198/2026 Alfej Ahmed S/o Shri Abdul Hameed @ Munna, Aged 23 Years, R/o Balaji Namkeen Walon Ke Samne, Gandhiji Ka Pul Kaithunipol, Kota City, Police Station Khaithunipol, District Kota. (At Present Confine In Central Jail Kota). ----Accused-Petitioner Versus State of Rajasthan, through P.P. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sameer Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Manvendra Singh Choudhary, PP HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SANGEETA SHARMA
Order 20/05/2026
1. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the accused-petitioner under Section 483 of BNSS in connection with FIR No. 161/2025 registered at Police Station Bhimganj Mandi, District Kota City for the offence(s) punishable under Sections 109(1), 189(2), 115(2) & 126(2) of B.N.S., 2023.
2.
Learned counsel for the accused-petitioner submits that the accused-petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case; that the charge-sheet has already been filed. He also submits that the accused-petitioner is in custody since 08.10.2025. He further submits that the main allegation is against Ashik Pathan & Bundu and the accused-petitioner has not been named in the FIR. He further submits that the co-accused persons namely, Ashik Pathan, Sameer & Bundu have already been enlarged on bail by the Trial Court itself vide order dated 17.09.2025, 15.09.2025 &
[2026:RJ-JP:21276] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-6198/2026] 18.09.2025 respectively; conclusion of trial will take its own time, so no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the accused- petitioner behind the bars and, therefore, prays that the accused- petitioner may be granted the benefit of bail under Section 483 of BNSS. 3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the accused- petitioners hereinabove and submits that there are 12 other criminal antecedents registered against the accused-petitioner. 4. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for both the parties; that the accused-petitioner is in custody since 08.10.2025; that charge-sheet has already been filed and the accused-petitioner has not been named in the FIR; that the co-accused persons namely, Ashik Pathan, Sameer & Bundu have already been enlarged on bail by the Trial Court itself vide order dated 17.09.2025, 15.09.2025 & 18.09.2025 respectively; that the trial will take its own time. Hence, this Court without expressing any opinion on the merits/demerits of the case, deems it just and proper to enlarge the accused-petitioner on bail. 5. Therefore, the instant bail application under Section 483 BNSS is accordingly, allowed and the accused-petitioner Alfej Ahmed S/o Shri Abdul Hameed @ Munna is ordered to be released on bail, provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- with two sureties of Rs. 50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the Trial Court, with the stipulation that he shall appear before that Court and any Court to which the matter is
[2026:RJ-JP:21276] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-6198/2026] transferred, on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so. 6.
It is made clear that the accused-petitioner shall not involve himself in any offence(s) during currency of the bail and he shall mark his presence once in a month in the concerned police station. 7. In case of any breach of the aforementioned conditions, the learned Public Prosecutor shall be free to move the application against the accused-petitioner for cancellation of the bail before the concerned Court. 8. The observation made hereinabove is only for decision of the instant bail application and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner. 9. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the concerned trial Court through e-mail/fax, for necessary compliance. (SANGEETA SHARMA),J PUNEET KUMAR/39