Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2026 DAILYLAW 9301 (RAJ)

GIRRAJ S/O BANSHILAL MEENA v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CRLMB/8042/2026 · 2026-07-06

Pramil Kumar Mathur

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2026:RJ-JP:25143] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 8042/2026 URN: CRLMB / 14691U / 2026 1. Girraj S/o Banshilal Meena, Aged About 36 Years, R/o Peepaldakalan, Police Station Kishanganj, District Baran (Raj.) (At Present Confined In District Jail Baran). 2. Dudharam S/o Banshilal Meena, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Peepaldakalan, Police Station Kishanganj, District Baran (Raj.) (At Present Confined In District Jail Baran). ----Petitioners Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Jagdish Nagar For Respondent(s) : Mr. Jaiprakash Tiwari, PP Mr. Ramlal, ASI, P.S. Nahargarh, District Baran is present in person HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAMIL KUMAR MATHUR Order 06/07/2026 1. The petitioners have preferred this bail application under Section 483 of BNSS in FIR No.69/2026 registered at Police Station Kishanganj, District Baran for offences under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 3(5) and 110 of BNS, 2023. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned Public Prosecutor and perused the material available on record. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that though an allegation has been made against the petitioners of having caused injury to a vital part of the body, the [2026:RJ-JP:25143] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-8042/2026] medical injury report shows that the said injury is neither grievous nor dangerous to life. It was also caused by a blunt weapon. Petitioners are behind the bars since 10.05.2026 without any criminal past. Charge-sheet has been filed. The trial of the case will take considerable time, therefore, no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioners in further custody, consequently, the bail application of the petitioners may be allowed. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application. 5. On consideration of the rival submissions and material available on record and in light of submissions made on behalf of petitioners but without expressing any opinion on merits/demerits of the case, I am inclined to grant benefit of bail to the petitioners. 6. Consequently, the bail application under Section 483 B.N.S.S. is allowed and it is directed that the petitioners Girraj S/o Banshilal Meena and Dudharam S/o Banshilal Meena, be released on bail provided each of them furnish a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court with the stipulation that they shall appear before that Court on all subsequent dates of hearing till conclusion of the trial. (PRAMIL KUMAR MATHUR),J 36/Arun