Rajasthan High Court
CRLMB/2252/2026 of AJRU @ AJRUDDIN S/O IBRAHIM Vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN on 26 February 2026
JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 2252/2026 Ajru @ Ajruddin S/o Ibrahim, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Jamalgarh, Police Station Punhana, District Nuh Mewat, Haryana. (At Present Accused Petitioner Confined In Sub Jail Deeg). ----Petitioner
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 2252/2026
Ajru @ Ajruddin S/o Ibrahim, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Jamalgarh, Police Station Punhana, District Nuh Mewat, Haryana.
(At Present Accused Petitioner Confined In Sub Jail Deeg).
----Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan, Through PP
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s)
:
Mr. Ankit Khandelwal
For Respondent(s)
:
Mr. Vivek Sharma, PP
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
26/02/2026
1. The present bail application has been filed by the accused- petitioner under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. in connection with F.I.R. No.214/2025 registered at Police Station Jurhera, District Deeg for the offence(s) punishable under Section(s) 303(2) & 317(2) of B.N.S and Section 4/25 of Arms Act.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and he has nothing to do with the alleged offences. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner is in custody since 10.07.2025 and no recovery is required to be made from him. He also submits that the alleged offences are triable by the Court of Magistrate; charge-sheet has already been filed in the matter and conclusion of trial will take considerably long time, so no fruitful purpose would be served by
(2 of 3) [CRLMB-2252/2026] keeping the petitioner into custody, and therefore prays to enlarge the petitioner on bail.
3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that the petitioner has criminal antecedents.
4. Taking into consideration the overall facts & circumstances of the case; the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner, the fact that the case is triable by the Court of Magistrate, charge-sheet has already been filed in the matter and trial will take considerably long time in its conclusion, without commenting anything upon the merits / demerits of the case, this Court deems it just and proper to enlarge the petitioner on bail.
5. Therefore, this bail application under Section 483 B.N.S.S. is allowed and the accused-petitioner, namely Ajru @ Ajruddin S/o Ibrahim, is ordered to be released on bail, provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.2,00,000/- with two sureties of Rs.1,00,000/- each to the satisfaction of the Trial Court, with the following conditions:-
(i) The accused-petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or influence the witness in any manner.
(ii) The accused-petitioner shall not indulge in any criminal activity and shall not repeat any criminal offence punishable under the Law.
(iii) The accused-petitioner shall attend the hearing of the trial Court on the date fixed by the trial Court or as and when asked to appear before the trial Court.
6. The accused-petitioner is directed to mark his presence before the concerned Police Station on 1st week of every month till
(3 of 3) [CRLMB-2252/2026] conclusion of trial. The SHO of the concerned Police Station shall forward petitioner’s attendance report to the Trial Court on the same day of each month.
7. In case of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Public Prosecutor shall be at liberty to move an application against the petitioner for cancellation of bail before the concerned Court.
8. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the concerned SHO for necessary compliance. (SANDEEP TANEJA),J AVINASH GULERIA /46