Allowed

Hasim Khan S/O Saddik Khan v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC15 Sept 2025/6294/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court granted bail to the petitioner-accused under Section 483 of BNSS in an FIR for offences under Section 308(5) of BNS, noting that the investigation was largely complete, the accused had no criminal antecedents, and he was not required for further investigation.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond of ₹50,000/- with two sureties of like amount.

Hasim Khan S/O Saddik Khan Vs State of Rajasthan — Bail and Remand | Rajasthan HC (2025)

¶1

[2025:RJ-JP:37473]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 6294/2025

¶4

Hasim Khan S/o Saddik Khan, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Village Raipur, Tehsil Kalka, Ps Pijore District Panchkula, Haryana, At Present Flat No. 38 B, High Land Park Jirakpur Ps Jirakpur District Sas Nagar, Punjab. (Presently Accused Confined In Central Jail, Alwar).

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. Kapil Gupta Mr. Dharmendra Kumar
	Mr. Chitransh Saxena
	Mr. Ankit Kumar
	Mr. Sushil Yadav
For Respondent(s)	: Ms. Arti Sharma, PP

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN

¶11

Order

¶12

15/09/2025

¶13

The present bail application under Section 483 of BNSS is filed by the applicant-accused Hasim Khan S/o Saddik Khan seeking bail in respect of a criminal case registered as FIR No. 126/2025 dated 30.03.2025 registered at P.S. N.E.B., District - Alwar, for the offence under Sections 308(5) of BNS.

¶14

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the matter and the investigation against him is complete and he is no more required in investigation. He further submits that there are no chance of fleeing of applicant accused from the

[2025:RJ-JP:37473]

[CRLMB-6294/2025]

(2 of 4)

jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court. The applicant does not have any criminal antecedents. He also submits that the applicant undertakes not to repeat offence and cooperate with investigation/trial, which will take time.

¶19

Learned counsel for petitioner submits that on the basis of complaint lodged by complainant against unknown persons, the matter is investigated by police. He further submitted that police has identified role and involvement of present petitioner and further arrested him. He further submitted that the mobile number used while commissioning the offence does not belong to present petitioner rather this mobile number belongs to any other person. He further submitted that there is no evidence about involvement of present petitioner and no recovery is effected from conscious possession of present petitioner. He also submitted that after investigation charge-sheet has already been filed and there is no criminal antecedent against petitioner accused who is in custody since his arrest on 23.04.2025.

¶20

Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application and submitted that the allegations are grave and serious in nature.

¶21

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner-accused and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material placed on record by both the parties.

¶22

On the basis of complaint lodged by complainant Donda Piyush Manjiibhai on 30.03.2025 about incident of kidnapping and further loot by unknown assailants a report is registered on 30.03.2025 at P.S. N.E.B., District Alwar.

[2025:RJ-JP:37473]

[CRLMB-6294/2025]

(3 of 4)

During investigation taking help of technology, mobile locations of complainant and further google timeline the accused were identified as Hasim Khan, Umer, Musarlin, Kamru Khan. After investigation, a charge-sheet has been filed though investigation has been kept pending under Section 193(9) of BNSS. The petitioner accused is in custody since 23.04.2025 and there is no criminal antecedent against the petitioner accused.

¶27

Upon hearing the arguments and perusing the record, we have found that the applicant-accused is no more required in the investigation and he is in custody for quite some time. The further proceedings will take its own time, therefore, looking to entirety of facts and circumstances of the case and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, the Court deems it appropriate to grant bail to the applicantaccused

¶28

Thus, the instant bail application filed on behalf of applicants-accused Hasim Khan S/o Saddik Khan, is hereby allowed and ordered to be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond of ₹50,000/- with two sureties of like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court with the following conditions:-

¶29

(i) The applicant-accused shall not tamper with evidence or influence the witness in any manner.

¶30

(ii) The applicant-accused shall not indulge in any criminal activity and shall not repeat any criminal offence punishable under the Law.

¶31

[2025:RJ-JP:37473]

¶32

[CRLMB-6294/2025]

¶33

(iii) The applicant-accused 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.

¶34

(iv) In case of any violation of above conditions, the bail granted to the applicant-accused shall be liable to be

¶35

canceled.

¶36

The Registry is directed to send a copy of this order to the Trial Court through E-mail.

¶37

(ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J

¶38

CHETNA BEHRANI /60

Hasim Khan S/O Saddik Khan v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hasim Khan S/O Saddik Khan v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Asim Khan @ Siddha S/O Fajru Vs the State of Rajasthan

Jogendra @ Joga S/O Shreebhan Vs the State of Rajasthan

Deenu S/O Peeru Vs State of Rajasthan

Mohan Lal Gupta S/O Shri Ramkunwar Gupta Vs State of Rajasthan

Suresh Kumar @ Madhu S/O Moolaram Vs State of Rajasthan

Rakesh S/O Dhannalal Vs State of Rajasthan