Rajasthan High Court
CRLBC/143/2023 of HANUMAN SON OF TIKKURAM Vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN on 18 February 2026
JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Bail Cancellation Application No. 143/2023 Hanuman S/o Tikkuram, Aged About 55 Years, R/o Village Singnaur, Police Station Gudhagodji, District Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State of Rajasthan, Through P.P. 2. Ramdhan
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Bail Cancellation Application No. 143/2023
Hanuman S/o Tikkuram, Aged About 55 Years, R/o Village Singnaur, Police Station Gudhagodji, District Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan.
----Petitioner
Versus
1.
State of Rajasthan, Through P.P.
2.
Ramdhan Adopted S/o Gopal, R/o Singnaur, Police Station Gudhagodji, District Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan.
3.
Rajveer S/o Shri Ramdhan, R/o Singnaur, Police Station Gudhagodji, District Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan.
4.
Chandrapal S/o Shri Ramdhan, R/o Singnaur Police Station Gudhagodji, District Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s)
:
Mr. Jai Raj Tantia
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
18/02/2026
1. The present application has been filed by the petitioner seeking cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the accused- respondents No. 2 to 4, vide order dated 16.10.2023, in S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 11299/2023 titled as Ramdhan & Ors v. State of Rajasthan.
2. This Court vide order dated 24.11.2025 directed the office to obtain status of the trial pending before the learned Trial Court. In compliance of the said order, the learned Judicial Magistrate, Udaipurwati, District Jhunjhunu, vide letter dated 05.12.2025, informed that after the grant of anticipatory bail by this Court, the
(2 of 2) [CRLBC-143/2023] accused-respondents No. 2 to 4 appeared before the trial court and filed a regular bail application under Section 437 Cr.P.C. which was heard and allowed by the learned Trial Court and now the matter is pending at the stage of framing of charges.
3. In view of the fact that the accused-respondents No. 2 to 4 have already been enlarged on regular bail, this application for cancellation of anticipatory bail does not survive and has rendered infructuous.
4. Accordingly, the present application for cancellation of anticipatory bail is dismissed as having become infructuous. (SANDEEP TANEJA),J SKS/1