Rajasthan High Court
CRLMB/2699/2026 of DHARMI S/O RAMDHAN Vs THE STATE OF RAJASTHA on 18 April 2026
JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 1921/2026 Bharatlal S/o Naval, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Village Sanvta, Police Station Khandar, District Sawai Madhopur. (At Present Confined In District Jail Sawai Madhopur). ----Petitioner Versus The
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 1921/2026
Bharatlal S/o Naval, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Village Sanvta, Police Station Khandar, District Sawai Madhopur. (At Present Confined In District Jail Sawai Madhopur).
----Petitioner
Versus
The State of Rajasthan, through PP
----Respondent
Connected With
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 2699/2026
Dharmi S/o Ramdhan, Aged About 36 Years, R/o Village Sanvta, Police Station Khandar, District Sawai Madhopur. (At Present Confined In District Jail Sawai Madhopur).
----Petitioner
Versus
The State of Rajasthan, through PP
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s)
:
Mr. Tarun Jain
For Respondent(s)
:
Mr. S.R. Dhakad, PP
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
18/04/2026
1. These bail applications have been filed by the accused petitioners u/S 483 BNSS in connection with FIR No. 22/2026 registered at Police Station Khandar, District Sawai Madhopur for offences punishable u/S 318(4), 319(2), 61(2)(A) of the BNS and Section 66D of the IT Act.
2. Learned counsel for the accused petitioners submits that the accused petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case. He
(2 of 3) [CRLMB-1921/2026] further submits that after conclusion of the investigation, the police has submitted charge-sheet in the matter. He further submits that no other criminal case of similar nature is pending against the accused petitioners. He also submits that the accused petitioners are in custody since 19.01.2026 and they are no more required for any kind of interrogation and recovery and the trial of the case will take its own time, therefore the accused petitioners may be released on bail.
3. Learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the bail application.
4. Having regard to the submissions made by learned counsel for the accused petitioners and so also the fact that no other criminal case of similar nature is pending against the accused petitioners and they are in custody since 19.01.2026, this Court, without expressing any opinion on merits/demerits of the case, deems just and proper to enlarge the accused petitioners on bail.
5. Accordingly, these bail applications are allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioners shall be released on bail provided that they furnish 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 the satisfaction of the Trial Court with the stipulation that they shall appear before that Court or any Court to which the matter is transferred, on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.
6. In case the accused-petitioners are found to be involved in any other criminal case of similar nature in future, the prosecution may move application for cancellation of their bail.
(3 of 3) [CRLMB-1921/2026]
7. A copy of this order be placed in connected file(s). (GANESH RAM MEENA),J Gaurav Srivastava /14-15