Allowed

Kanaram S/O Madaram v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC6 Oct 2025CRLMB/12151/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regular bail application by two accused arrested in FIR No. 318/2025 of Police Station Dadwara, Kota Rural, for offences under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 110 and 3(5) BNS arising from a cross-FIR quarrel. The court noted prolonged custody, absence of antecedents and non-attribution of the grievous injury to any specific accused, without discussing merits, and allowed bail.

What did the court decide?

Applicants to be released on bail on personal bond of Rs. 1,00,000 each with two sureties of Rs. 50,000 each, appearing as directed.

Kanaram S/O Madaram Vs State of Rajasthan — Bail and Remand | Rajasthan HC (2025)

¶1

[2025:RJ-JP:40292]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 12151/2025

¶4

Kanaram S/o Madaram, R/o Chavarda Thana Bhadrajun District Jalor.

¶5

Bhudaram @ Bhairu S/o Bachnaram, R/o Ajeetpura Thana Aahor District Jalor Rajasthan. (Both At Present Confined At Central Jail Kota).

¶6

----Petitioners

¶7

Versus

¶8

State of Rajasthan, Through PP

¶9

----Respondent

¶10

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Abdul Kalam Khan, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shree Ram Dhakar, GA cum AAG

¶11

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SHRIMALI

¶12

Order

¶13

06/10/2025

¶14

izkFkhZ&vfHk;qDrx.k dh vksj ls viuh fu;fer tekur gsrq ;g tekur izkFkZuk i= varxZr /kkjk 483 Hkkjrh; ukxfjd lqj{kk lafgrk ¼439 na-iz-la-½ iqfyl Fkkuk dSFkwu] dksVk xzkeh.k esa ntZ izFke lwpuk fjiksVZ la[;k 318@2025 vijk/k vUrxZr /kkjk 115¼2½] 126¼2½] 110] 3¼5½ ch-,u-,l- esa is'k fd;k x;k gSA

¶15

fo}ku vf/koDrk izkFkhZ&vfHk;qDrx.k us rdZ fn;k fd vfHk;qDrx.k funksZ"k gS] mUgsa feF;k :i ls fyIr fd;k x;k gS] os yacs le; ls vfHkj{kk esa gSa] muds fo:) iwoZ esa dksbZ vkijkf/kd izdj.k ntZ ugha gqvk gS] vr%

¶16

(2 of 3) [CRLMB-12151/2025]

¶17

[2025:RJ-JP:40292]

¶18

izkFkhZ&vfHk;qDrx.k dk tekur izkFkZuk i= Lohdkj dj mUgsa tekur ij fjgk fd;k tkosA

¶19

fo}ku yksd vfHk;kstd us vijk/k dh xaHkhjrk dks ns[krs gq, ;g tekur vkosnu [kkfjt fd;s tkus dh izkFkZuk dhA

¶20

nksuksa i{kksa dh cgl ds lanHkZ esa vfHkys[k ij miyC/k lkexzh dk voyksdu fd;kA

¶21

orZeku izdj.k esa ifjoknh i{k dh HkSalksa dks ns[kdj vfHk;qDr i{k dh HksM+ksa ds pedus ds dkj.k nksuksa i{kksa esa fookn gqvk gS] nksuksa i{kksa dh vksj ls ØkWl ,Q-vkbZ-vkj- djok;h x;h gS] vkgr fjUdw ds vfrfjDr vU; vkgrx.k ds lk/kkj.k izdfr dh pksVsa vk;h gSa] vkgr fjUdw ds ,d pksV izk.k?kkrd izdfr dh dkfjr gqbZ gS] mDr pksV fdl vfHk;qDr }kjk dkfjr dh x;h gS] ;g izFke lwpuk fjiksVZ esa vafdr ugha gS uk gh lk{khx.k ds /kkjk 161 na-iz-la- ds c;kuksa esa fdlh vfHk;qDr fo”ks’k dk uke vk;k gS] izkFkhZ@vfHk;qDrx.k yacs le; ls vfHkj{kk esa gS] izdj.k ds fopkj.k esa le; yxsxkA

¶22

vr% izdj.k ds rF;ksa] ifjfLFkfr;ksa] izLrqr rdksaZ ,oa izkFkhZ@vfHk;qDrx.k dh vfHkj{kk vof/k dks n`f"Vxr j[krs gq, izdj.k ds xq.k&nks"kksa ij fVIi.kh fd;s fcuk izkFkhZ@vfHk;qDrx.k dks tekur dk ykHk fn;k tkuk mfpr izrhr gksrk gSA

¶23

ifj.kker% izkFkhZ@vfHk;qDr 1- dkukjke iq= eknkjke 2- Hkwnkjke mQZ HkS: iq= cpukjke dh vksj ls izLrqr ;g tekur izkFkZuk i= Lohdkj dj vkns'k fn;k tkrk gS fd izkFkhZx.k bl ekeys esa fo}ku fopkj.k U;k;ky; ds larks"kizn] muds U;k;ky; ;k varfjrh U;k;ky; esa fu;r frfFk;ksa ij ,oa tc Hkh mUgsa cqyk;k tk,] mifLFkfr gsrq izR;sd }kjk ,d yk[k :i;s dk

¶24

[2025:RJ-JP:40292]

¶25

(3 of 3) [CRLMB-12151/2025]

¶26

cU/k&i= rFkk ipkl&ipkl gtkj :i;s dh nks lqn`< izfrHkwfr;ka izLrqr dj izekf.kr djkosa rFkk mldh fdlh vU; izdj.k esa vko';drk u gks] rks mUgsa gLrxr izdj.k esa tekur ij fjgk dj fn;k tkosA

¶27

(CHANDRA PRAKASH SHRIMALI),J

¶28

MANISH SAINI /172 (8)

Kanaram S/O Madaram v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kanaram S/O Madaram 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

Smt. Laali W/O Late Rajesh Kumar Vs Mahendra Kumar S/O Hari

Smt. Sangeeta Devi W/O Late Shri Satya Prakash Prajapati, Vs Coco by Dhfl General Insurance Company Limited

Navi General Insurance Limited Vs Smt. Santoshi W/O Late Sh. Balram

Shamsher Singh S/O Babulal Vs State of Rajasthan

Tejaram @ Mulya S/O Sagar @ Blyo Vs the State of Rajasthan

Manoj Kumar S/O Shri Moti Lal Vs State of Rajasthan