Rajasthan High Court
CRLMB/919/2026 of ALI MOHAMMAD S/O UMAR Vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN on 12 February 2026
JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 919/2026 Ali Mohammad S/o Umar, Aged About 21 Years, R/o Village Somka, Police Station Pahari, District Deeg (Rajasthan). At Present In District Jail, Deeg. ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through
[2026:RJ-JP:6666]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 919/2026
Ali Mohammad S/o Umar, Aged About 21 Years, R/o Village Somka, Police Station Pahari, District Deeg (Rajasthan). At Present In District Jail, Deeg.
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through PP
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s)
:
Mr. Harendra Singh with
Mr. Shivam Sharma &
Mr. Mohan Lal
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
12/02/2026
1. This bail application has been filed by the accused-petitioner under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. in connection with FIR No.295/2025 registered at Police Station Pahadi, District Deeg, for the offence(s) punishable under Section(s) 115(2), 126(2), 333 & 109(1) B.N.S.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the accused- petitioner, who is an innocent person, has been falsely implicated in this case and he has nothing to do with the alleged offences. Learned counsel further submits that initially F.I.R. was lodged under Sections 115(2), 126(2) & 189(2) B.N.S., however, after investigation, offences under Sections 333 & 109(1) B.N.S. were added. Learned counsel also submits that the petitioner was forcefully taken by the complainant to the place of incident and started quarreling with him.
3. Learned counsel contends that as per the injury report, the injuries sustained by the complainant are simple in nature, however, only one injury was found to be grievous in nature, not being dangerous to life, and the same was caused by a blunt weapon. Learned counsel
[2026:RJ-JP:6666] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-919/2026] further submits that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent; he is in custody since 14.12.2025 and charge-sheet has already been filed in the matter. Learned counsel also submits that no further recovery is required to be made from the petitioner and trial will considerably take long time in its conclusion, so no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner in custody, therefore, the benefit of bail under Section 483 B.N.S.S. may be granted to the accused-petitioner.
4. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner hereinabove.
5. Taking into consideration the overall facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner, the fact that charge-sheet has already been filed, injuries inflicted are simple in nature except one, which is also not dangerous to life, trial will take considerably 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.
6. Therefore, the bail application under Section 483 B.N.S.S. is allowed and the accused-petitioner, namely Ali Mohammad S/o Umar, 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 /27