Allowed

Ajit Singh S/O Raju v. the State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC19 Sept 2025CRLMB/11954/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regular bail applications under Section 483 BNSS by two accused in a charge-sheeted case under various BNS provisions. Court noted head-injury allegation was against co-accused Deva Gurjar and other co-accused were already on bail; allowed bail with conditions including monthly police-station presence.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners released on bail on personal bond Rs.50,000 each with two sureties of Rs.25,000 each, subject to monthly police-station attendance till trial concludes.

Ajit Singh S/O Raju Vs the State of Rajasthan — Bail and Remand | Rajasthan HC (2025)

¶1

[2025:RJ-JP:38453]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 11954/2025

¶4

Ajit Singh S/o Raju, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Keshavpura Malipada, Police Station Hindaun City, District Karauli (Rajasthan) (At Present In Sub Jail Hindaun City).

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

Connected With

¶10

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 11955/2025 Ajay @ Golu S/o Harimohan, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Keshavpura Malipada, Police Station Hindaun City, District Karauli (Raj.) (At Present In Sub Jail Hindaun City).

¶11

----Petitioner

¶12

Versus

¶13

The State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

¶14

----Respondent

¶15

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ved Prakash Sogarwal For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP with Mr. Tapesh Agarwal, PP

¶16

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN

¶17

Order

¶18

19/09/2025

¶19

These bail applications under Section 483 of BNSS have been filed on behalf of the petitioners, who have been arrested in connection with FIR No.211/2025 registered at Police Station Hindaun, District Karauli for the offences punishable under Sections 189(2), 115(2), 126(2), 324(4), 324(5) & 303(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (in short, ‘BNS’), 2023. After completion of investigation, police filed charge-sheet in this matter for the

[2025:RJ-JP:38453]

[CRLMB-11954/2025]

(2 of 4)

offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 324(4), 324(5), 117(2), 109(1), 351(3), 190, 191(2), 331(8), 352 and 125 of BNS, 2023.

¶24

It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that the accused-petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. Learned counsel submits that allegation of causing head injury is against co-accused namely- Deva Gurjar. It is submitted that other co-accused persons namely Anil Kumar and Manoj Kumar have been granted benefit of bail by this court. It is contended that trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. Counsel submits that petitioners are in custody since 07.07.2025 and further custody of the petitioners would not serve any fruitful purpose.

¶25

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioners. He submits that several other cases have been registered against the petitioners.

¶26

I have considered the contentions.

¶27

Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, especially considering the material available on record in the form of charge-sheet, as also considering the fact that allegation of causing injury on the head of the injured is against co-accused namely- Deva Gurjar and aforementioned co-accused persons have been granted bail by this court; trial will take considerable time in its conclusion as well as looking to the custody period, but without commenting anything

[2025:RJ-JP:38453]

[CRLMB-11954/2025]

(3 of 4)

on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it proper to allow these bail applications.

¶32

These bail applications are accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioners – (1) Ajit Singh S/o Raju & 2) Ajay @ Golu S/o Harimohan, shall be released on bail provided each of them furnishes a 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

It is made clear that the accused-petitioners shall not involve in any other offence(s) during currency of the bail and they shall mark their presence in first week of every month in the concerned police station, till trial is concluded.

¶34

Concerned SHO is directed to maintain a register recording the attendance of the petitioners, as directed above. In case the petitioners fail to mark their presence in the concerned police station, as directed above, the concerned SHO is directed to immediately report the matter to the concerned Court in this regard.

¶35

Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the concerned SHO for necessary compliance.

¶36

If any breach of these conditions is reported or come to the notice of the Court, the same shall alone be a reason for the trial Court to cancel the bail granted to them by this Court.

(4 of 4)

[2025:RJ-JP:38453]

[CRLMB-11954/2025]

The observations made hereinabove is only for the decision

¶41

of this bail application and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner.

¶42

(ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J

¶43

GAUTAM JAIN /48-49

Ajit Singh S/O Raju v. the State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajit Singh S/O Raju v. the 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

Ankit @ Monu S/O Mukhram Yadav Vs State of Rajasthan

Ajay Singh @ Chinnu S/O Shri Balwant Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Kaluram @ Kalu @ Laxman S/O Sh. Shankar Vs State of Rajasthan

Munna S/O Ramswaroop Vs the State of Rajasthan

Prakash Vishnoi S/O Vasudev Vs the State of Rajasthan

Raisa Bano @ Rani W/O Hakeem Khan Vs State of Rajasthan