Allowed

Sahil Khan S/O Shri Shahid Ahmed v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC1 Sept 2025CRLMB/10052/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court allowed bail for two accused petitioners arrested under BNS 2023 in a road accident dispute case. The court considered lack of criminal history and trial duration, directing release on personal bond and sureties without pre-judging case merits.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted subject to personal bond of Rs.50,000 and two sureties of Rs.25,000 each.

Sahil Khan S/O Shri Shahid Ahmed Vs State of Rajasthan — Bail and Remand | Rajasthan HC (2025)

¶1

[2025:RJ-JP:34862]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 10051/2025

¶4

Nadeem Qureshi S/o Mehraj Qureshi, Aged About 38 Years, R/o 342-A, Aman Residency, Sanjay Nagar-D Jhotwara, Police Station Jhotwara, District Jaipur. (At Present Accused Is Confined In District Jail Jaipur).

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

Connected With

¶10

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 10052/2025 Sahil Khan S/o Shri Shahid Ahmed, Aged About 22 Years, R/o Ward No 7, Pathnon Ka Mohalla, Via Khandela, Dayara Rural, District Sikar, Rajasthan. (Accused Petitioner Presently Confined In Central Jail, Jaipur).

¶11

----Petitioner

¶12

Versus

¶13

State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

¶14

----Respondent

¶15

For Petitioner(s)	:	Mr. Martand Pratap Singh Mr. Anirudh Tyagi
For Respondent(s)	:	Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP with
		Mr. Gaurav Gupta,Assistant GA

¶16

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN

¶17

Order

¶18

01/09/2025

¶19

These instant bail applications have been filed under Section 483 of BNSS, on behalf of the petitioners, who have been arrested in connection with FIR No.410/2025 registered at Police Station Shyam Nagar, District Jaipur City (South) (Raj.) for the offences punishable under Sections 310(2), 308(4) & 140(3) of BNS, 2023.

[2025:RJ-JP:34862]

[CRLMB-10051/2025]

(2 of 3)

It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that the accused-petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. It is submitted that heated arguments on account of road accident has been converted into serious criminal offence. Counsel submits that as per paragraph 4 of the impugned order dated 04.08.2025, complainant has no objection if benefit of bail is granted to petitioner- Nadeem Qureshi. It is contended that there are no criminal antecedents against the petitioners and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. Counsel submit that petitioners are in custody since their date of arrest and further custody of the petitioners would not serve any fruitful purpose.

¶24

Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioners.

¶25

I have considered the contentions.

¶26

Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioners, especially considering the material available before me in the form of case diary, as also considering the fact that there are no criminal antecedents against the petitioners and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion as well as looking to the custody period, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it proper to allow these bail applications.

¶27

These bail applications are accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioners – 1) Nadeem Qureshi S/o

¶28

Mehraj Qureshi and 2) Sahil Khan S/o Shri Shahid Ahmed shall be released on bail provided each of them furnishes a

[CRLMB-10051/2025]

[2025:RJ-JP:34862]

(3 of 3)

personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000/(Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court with the stipulation that they shall appear before that Court and any court to which the matter is transferred, on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.

¶33

The observations made hereinabove are only for decision of the instant bail applications and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner.

¶34

(ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J

¶35

GAUTAM JAIN /127-128

Sahil Khan S/O Shri Shahid Ahmed v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sahil Khan S/O Shri Shahid Ahmed 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

Yogesh Alias Chotu S/O Ramvtar Vs State of Rajasthan

Gopal Luhar S/O Radheshyam Vs State of Rajasthan

Govind Modani S/O Shri Ganesh Modani Vs the State of Rajasthan

Karamveer Singh S/O Bhagwan Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Teju Singh @ Tej Singh S/O Parwat Singh, Vs State of Rajasthan

Mohammad Akram S/O Mohammad Afjal Vs State of Rajasthan