Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2026 DAILYLAW 9374 (RAJ)

PRADHAN BHEEL @ BUNTY S/O SHRI GODURAM BHEEL v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CRLMB/9410/2026 · 2026-07-03

Sangeeta Sharma

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2026:RJ-JP:24829] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 9409/2026 URN: CRLMB / 17360U / 2026 Om Singh @ Banna S/o Shri Hari Singh, Aged About 22 Years, R/o M. No. 67 E, Rukmani Nagar-D, Vijaypur Road, P.S. Jamdoli, District Jaipur (East), Rajasthan. (At Present Accused Is Confined In Judicial Custody) ----Accused-Petitioner/Applicant Versus State of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor ----Respondent Connected With S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 9410/2026 URN: CRLMB / 17361U / 2026 Pradhan Bheel @ Bunty S/o Shri Goduram Bheel, Aged 24 Years, R/o Village Budhdevlal, P/s Lambaharisingh, District Tonk, Currently Kamal Gurjar Ka House Shrirampura Tibba, Tehsil Bassi P/s Kanota, Jaipur. (Presently Accused Petitioner Is Confined In Central Jail, Jaipur). ----Accused-Petitioner Versus State of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sahaj Veer Bajwa Mr. Rajendra Singh Rajawat For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sudesh Saini, PP HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SANGEETA SHARMA Order 03/07/2026 1. These instant bail applications have been filed on behalf of the accused-petitioners under Section 483 of BNSS in connection with FIR No. 183/2026 registered at Police Station Jamdoli, [2026:RJ-JP:24829] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-9409/2026] District Jaipur City (East) for the offence(s) punishable under Sections 189(2), 329(3) and 324(4) of BNS. 2. Learned counsel for the accused-petitioners submits that the accused-petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case; that the accused-petitioners are in custody since long; 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-petitioners 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. It is further submitted that there are two other criminal antecedents registered against both the accused- petitioners so, they should not be enlarged on bail. 4. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and material available on record; that the accused- petitioners are in custody since 26.05.2026; that both the accused-petitioners are on bail in other two criminal cases registered against them; that the name of the accused-petitioners is not in the FIR; that no Test Identification Parade has been conducted; that the main allegations are on the co-accused persons namely Vishnu and Ajit; 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-petitioners on bail. 5. Therefore, these instant bail applications under Section 483 BNSS are accordingly, allowed and the accused-petitioners namely Om Singh @ Banna S/o Shri Hari Singh and Pradhan [2026:RJ-JP:24829] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-9409/2026] Bheel @ Bunty S/o Shri Goduram Bheel are ordered to be released on bail, provided each of them 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 they shall appear before that Court and any Court to which the matter is transferred, on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so. 6. It is made clear that the accused-petitioners shall not involve themselves in any offence(s) during currency of the bail. 7. In case of any breach of the aforementioned conditions, the learned Public Prosecutor shall be free to move the application against the accused-petitioners for cancellation of the bail before the concerned Court. 8. The observation made hereinabove is only for decision of the instant bail applications 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 70-71/KAVISH