Rajasthan High Court
CRLMB/1983/2026 of RESHAM W/O ROSHANLAL D/O SHYORAM SAINI Vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN on 21 April 2026
JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 1983/2026 Resham W/o Roshanlal D/o Shyoram Saini, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Nimuchana Police Station Basdayal Tehsil Narayanpur At Present Sasural Resident Of Ward No. 03, Kanpur Lodge Post Mundawara, Tehsil
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No.
Resham W/o Roshanlal D/o Shyoram Saini, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Nimuchana Police Station Basdayal Tehsil Narayanpur At Present Sasural Resident Of Ward No. 03, Kanpur Lodge Post Mundawara, Tehsil Narayanpur District Kotputali Behror (Rajasthan)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through PP
----Respondent
Connected With
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No.
Premchand @ Khyaliram S/o Shyoram, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Nimuchana Police Station Basdayal Tehsil Narayanpur District Kotputali Behror (Rajasthan).
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through PP
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s)
:
Mr. Jai Raj Tantia
For Respondent(s)
:
Ms. Aarti Sharma, P.P.
Mr. Saurabh Yadav, for complainant
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA
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
21/04/2026
1. The accused-petitioners have filed these anticipatory bail applications under Section 482 B.N.S.S. arising out of F.I.R. No. 165/2025 registered with the Police Station Basdayal, District Kotputli-Behror for offences punishable under Sections 189(2),
(2 of 4) [CRLMB-1983/2026] 115(2), 126(2) of B.N.S., 2023 in F.I.R. and against the order dated 23.01.2026 whereby learned Trial Court dismissed the bail applications filed by the accused-petitioners for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 189(2), 117(2), 110 of B.N.S. 2023.
2. Learned counsel for the accused-petitioners submits that accused-petitioners have been falsely implicated in the present case. There is a tendency in the rural areas that when any such kind of incident takes place, the whole members of the family are implicated as accused. Counsel further submits that, as per the contents of the First Information Report, no specific allegation has been levelled against the accused-petitioner Resham. Learned counsel further submits that the allegation against the accused Premchand @ Khyaliram is of causing injury to the injured Babulal on his head with a wooden stick, however, as per the injury report, the injury attributed to him, is opined to be simple in nature. Counsel also submits that the accused-petitioners are ready to cooperate in the investigation.
3. Learned Public Prosecutor as well as counsel for the complainant opposed the bail applications.
4. Considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the accused-petitioners as well as learned Public Prosecutor assisted by counsel for the complainant and perused the case diary.
5. As per the averments made in the First Information Report, no specific overt act has been assigned to the accused-
(3 of 4) [CRLMB-1983/2026] petitioner Resham. So far as the accused Premchand @ Khyaliram is concerned with the allegation of causing injury to the injured Babulal with a wooden stick on his head and however that injury has been opined to be simple in nature. It is a tendency in the rural areas that whenever any scuffle takes place in between two parties, all the members of the family are arrayed as accused and more particularly the government employees or the students, who are going to seek employment.
6. Taking into consideration the overall facts and circumstances of the case and more particularly the nature of allegations levelled against the accused-petitioners, the possibility of false implication cannot be ruled out. Therefore, this Court deems it just and proper to extend the benefit of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
7. Accordingly, these Anticipatory Bail Applications are allowed. The S.H.O./I.O./Arresting Authority, Police Station Basdayal, District Kotputli-Behror in F.I.R. No. 165/2025 is directed that in the event of arrest of the petitioners, they shall be released on bail, provided each of them furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lac only) (each) together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) (each) to his satisfaction on the following conditions:-
(i) that the petitioners shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;
(ii) that the petitioners shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted
(4 of 4) [CRLMB-1983/2026] with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or any police officer, and
(iii) that the petitioners shall not leave India without previous permission of the Court.
8. A copy of this order be placed in the connected bail application. (GANESH RAM MEENA),J SHRUTI SHARMA /51,52