CRLMB/12828/2026 of RUBBAD S/O MISSAR KHAN Vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN on 18 August 2026

1. Rubbad S/o Missar Khan, R/o Village Hathiya, Police Station Barsana, District Mathura, Uttar Pradesh. (At Present Confined In District Jail Deeg).

2. Kalu S/o Missar Khan, R/o Village Hathiya, Police Station Barsana, District Mathura, Uttar Pradesh. (At Present Confined In District Jail Deeg). ----Accused-Petitioners Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Non Petitioner For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Yogesh Singhal Ms. Saroj singh For Respondent(s) : Mr. Amit Kumar Gupta, P.P. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIPIN GUPTA Judgment / Order 18/08/2026

1. The present bail application has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 against the order dated 06.08.2026 passed by the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge Kumher, District Deeg, in Criminal Misc. Case No.109/2026, whereby the bail application of the petitioners was rejected in connection with F.I.R. No.37/2012, Police Station-Kumher, District-Bharatpur for the offences under Section 392 & 412 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are in custody since 11.05.2026. He further submits that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in the case solely on account of the main accused, namely, Deena @ Deenu, from

(2 of 3) [CRLMB-12828/2026] whom the tractor was recovered. He also submits that Deena @ Deenu stated that he had purchased the tractor from Jamalu and the present petitioners whereas there is nothing on record to show that the tractor in dispute was sold by the present petitioners to Deena @ Deenu. He also submits that the main accused, Deena @ Deenu, has already been acquitted by the learned Sessions Judge No. 2, Bharatpur, vide judgment dated 16.04.2019. He also submits that there is no criminal antecedents against the accused- petitioners of having committed any offence of similar nature or any other nature in past. Further, the co-accused Jamalu has also been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 27.07.2026 in S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 8764/2026 and the case of the petitioner is on no lessor footing than that of the co-accused and therefore, he prays that the petitioners may be enlarged on bail.

3. Learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposes the present bail application.

4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned Public Prosecutor and perused the material available on record.

5. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and upon consideration of the fact that the petitioners are in custody since 11.05.2026; there is no criminal antecedents against the accused-petitioners of having committed any offence of similar nature or any other nature in past; co-accused has already been enlarged on bail; the petitioners have not been named in the FIR; the recovery was made from one Deena @ Deenu; the present petitioners have been implicated solely on the basis of the

(3 of 3) [CRLMB-12828/2026] statement of Deena @ Deenu as well as the fact that the recovery was effected from Deena @ Deenu, who has already been acquitted by the learned Sessions Judge No. 2, Bharatpur, vide judgment dated 16.04.2019, this Court is of the opinion that the bail application filed by the petitioner deserves to be accepted.

6. Consequently, the bail application is allowed. It is ordered that the accused-petitioners namely-(i)Rubbad S/o Missar Khan and (ii) Kalu S/o Missar Khan arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.37/2012, Police Station-Kumher, District-Bharatpur, shall be released on bail; provided they furnish a personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rs. One Lakh Only) with two sureties of Rs. 50,000/- (Rs. Fifty Thousand Only) each, to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court, with the stipulation that they shall appear before the said Court on all dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so until completion of the trial, subject to the following conditions:

(i) The petitioners shall not leave country without the permission of the Court;

(ii) The petitioners shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which they are accused, or suspected, of the commission of which they are suspected;

(iii) The petitioners shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (BIPIN GUPTA),J 66/KRATIKA