Rajasthan High Court
CRLMB/10164/2026 of GULI @ MUKESH S/O BHAGWANARAM Vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN on 31 August 2026
JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 10164/2026 CNR: RJHC020602642026 | URN: CRLMB / 18868U / 2026 Guli @ Mukesh S/o Bhagwanaram, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Village Jagmalpura, Kachha Rasta, Ward No. 45, Sikar, Rajasthan, Presently Confined In
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 10164/2026
CNR: RJHC020602642026 | URN: CRLMB / 18868U / 2026
Guli @ Mukesh S/o Bhagwanaram, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Village Jagmalpura, Kachha Rasta, Ward No. 45, Sikar, Rajasthan, Presently Confined In District Jail, Tonk.
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through PP
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s)
:
Mr. Gaurav Singh
For Respondent(s)
:
Mr.Vijay Singh Yadav, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI CHIRANIA
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
Order
31/08/2026
1. The instant bail application has been filed by the petitioner Guli @ Mukesh S/o Bhagwanaram, who was arrested by the police in connection with FIR No. 356/2025 dated 20.11.2025 registered at Police Station Kotwali Tonk, District Tonk for the offences punishable under Sections 316(2) and 318(4) of BNS, 2023.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the dispute in the present case is in regard to the sale and purchase of the vehicle in question. He further submitted that the learned Trial Court rejected the petitioner’s bail application on the ground that there are six criminal cases against him in the past. He further submitted that out of six cases, the petitioner has already been acquitted in five cases and as far as one case is concerned, he was convicted by the learned Trial Court by judgment dated 04.02.2020. Apart from that, there are no criminal cases of any
(2 of 3) [CRLMB-10164/2026] nature. In view of the above, learned counsel prays that the petitioner may be enlarged on bail.
3. Learned Public Prosecutor strongly opposed the bail application by stating that the petitioner has further transferred/sold the vehicle which is yet to be recovered.
4. This Court considered the fact that the petitioner is behind the bars since 28.03.2026 and the trial will take sufficiently long time. As far as the criminal antecedents are concerned, petitioner has already been acquitted in five cases and convicted only in one case, that was of year 2017. Apart from that, there are no criminal antecedents against the petitioner. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, without commenting anything upon the merits or demerits of the case, this Court is inclined to exercise its power under Section 483 B.N.S.S. and deems it just and proper to enlarge the petitioner on bail.
5. Accordingly, the instant bail application filed under Section 483 B.N.S.S. is allowed and it is directed that petitioner Guli @ Mukesh S/o Bhagwanaram shall be released on bail, provided he executes a personal bond in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-with two sound and solvent sureties of Rs.50,000/- each to the satisfaction of learned Trial Court for his appearance before that Court on each and every date of hearing and whenever called upon to do so till the completion of the trial. The petitioner is further directed not to take undue advantage of liberty or misuse liberty. It is made clear that the observation as made by this Court in the bail application will not affect the trial of the case.
6. The petitioner shall also mark his presence before the SHO of the concerned Police Station once a month for the entire period of
(3 of 3) [CRLMB-10164/2026] the trial without any fail. SHO shall mark his presence and maintain record of the same. In case the petitioner fails to mark his presence, this bail application shall stands cancelled without further reference to this Court. (RAVI CHIRANIA),J 64/RAHUL KUMAR