Rajasthan High Court
CRLMB/6180/2026 of DHANRAJ MEENA S/O SIYARAM MEENA Vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN on 14 May 2026
JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 6180/2026 Dhanraj Meena S/o Siyaram Meena, Aged About 44 Years, R/o Lalakhedi, P.s. Khanpur, District Jhalawar. At Present In District Jail, Jhalawar. ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP
[2026:RJ-JP:20367]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 6180/2026
Dhanraj Meena S/o Siyaram Meena, Aged About 44 Years, R/o Lalakhedi, P.s. Khanpur, District Jhalawar. At Present In District Jail, Jhalawar.
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through PP
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s)
:
Mr. Harendra Singh
For Respondent(s)
:
Mr. Vivek Sharma, PP
Mr. Sikandar Singh Sakkarwal
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP TANEJA
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
14/05/2026
1. This bail application has been filed by the accused-petitioner under Section 483 of BNSS in connection with FIR No. 93/2026 registered at Police Station Khanpur, District Jhalawar, for the offence(s) punishable under Section(s) 103(1)/55 BNS.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the accused- petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and he has nothing to do with the alleged offences. Learned counsel further submits that from the FIR, no case under Section 103(1) BNS is made out against the petitioner. Learned counsel also submits that the petitioner is in custody since 06.04.2026, no recovery is required to be made from him and investigation as well as trial will take considerably long time in its conclusion, so no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner in custody, therefore, the benefit of bail may be granted to the petitioner.
[2026:RJ-JP:20367] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-6180/2026]
3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner hereinabove. However, learned counsel for the complainant submits that the complainant has no objection if the present petitioner is enlarged on regular bail.
4. Taking into consideration the overall facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, the fact that investigation and trial will take long time in its conclusion, thus, without commenting anything on the merits / demerits of the case, this Court deems it just and proper to enlarge the petitioner on bail.
5. Therefore, the bail application under Section 483 BNSS is allowed and the accused-petitioner, namely Dhanraj Meena S/o Siyaram Meena, is ordered to be released on bail, provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the Trial Court, with the stipulation that the petitioner shall appear before that Court on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when he is called upon to do so. (SANDEEP TANEJA),J SAHIL SONI /13