Atik S/O Shri Deen Mohammad Vs State of Rajasthan

[2025:RJ-JP:48944]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 14628/2025

Imran Khan S/o Pappu Khan, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Bhainsa Patti Khurd, Police Station Todabhim, District Karauli, Rajasthan (At Present Accused Is Confined In District Jail Karauli)

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p.

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

Connected With

¶10

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 15755/2025

¶11

Atik S/o Shri Deen Mohammad, Aged About 36 Years, R/o Bhaisakhurd, Police Station Todabhim, District Karauli (Raj.) (The Accused- Petitioner Presently Confined In Sub- Jail Hindaun, District Karauli)

¶12

----Petitioner

¶13

Versus

¶14

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶15

----Respondent

¶16

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mohit Khandelwal with Mr. Pranav Sharma, Mr. Hitarth Dixit, Mr. Aditya Gupta Mr. Rajneesh Gupta with Mr. Rahul Sharma, Mr. Amir Khan, Mr. Utkarsh Goyal, Mr. Shiv Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Jaiprakash Tiwari, PP For Complainant(s) Ms. Shashi Sharma for Mr. Manoj Kumar Avasthi

¶17

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAMIL KUMAR MATHUR

Order

02/12/2025

[2025:RJ-JP:48944]

[CRLMB-14628/2025]

(2 of 3)

The petitioners have filed these bail applications under Section 483 of BNSS in FIR No.0205/2025 registered at Police Station Todabhim, District Karauli for offences under Sections 318(4), 319(2), 338, 336(3), 340(2) of BNS, 2023.

¶24

Since both these bail applications arise out of common FIR, hence, they are being decided by this common order.

¶25

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned Public Prosecutor and counsel for the complainant and perused the material available on record.

¶26

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in these cases. He further averred that petitioner- Imran is grandson of Gafur and the disputed land was in the name of Gafur in revenue records. He further contends that allegations levelled against petitionerImran is that he has got mutation of the disputed land in his favour by using the false and fabricated documents. He again argued that as per letter No.1348 dated 18.09.2025 issued by Tehsildar, it is clear that disputed land was recorded in the name of Gafur and certificate issued by the concerned Patwari shows that present petitioner Imran is the grandson of the deceasedGafur. He further submits that FIR has been lodged on the basis of false and concocted grounds. Learned counsel for petitionerAtik submits that he has falsely been implicated in this case. There is no iota of evidence during investigation by which it can be inferred that Atik has committed the alleged offence. They further contend that accused have been behind the bars since 12.10.2025 and 12.11.2025 respectively. The trial of the case will take considerable time and no further custodial interrogation is

(3 of 3)

[2025:RJ-JP:48944]

[CRLMB-14628/2025]

required, hence the bail applications of the petitioners may be allowed.

¶31

Learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the complainant have vehemently opposed the bail applications.

¶32

On consideration of the rival submissions and material available on record and in the light of submission made by learned counsel for the petitioners but without expressing any opinion on merits/demerits of the case, I am inclined to grant benefit of bail to the petitioners.

¶33

Consequently, the bail applications under Section 483 B.N.S.S. are allowed and it is directed that the petitioners Imran Khan S/o Pappu Khan and Atik S/o Shri Deen Mohammad, be released on bail provided each of them furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court with the stipulation that each of them shall appear before that Court on all subsequent dates of hearing till conclusion of the trial.

¶34

(PRAMIL KUMAR MATHUR),J

¶35

Chandan/125-126

Atik S/O Shri Deen Mohammad v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Atik S/O Shri Deen Mohammad v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jaipal Yadav S/O Shri Tejpal Yadav Vs State of Rajasthan

Ishwar Singh S/O Shri Dharm Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Radha Yogi W/O Sh. Mohan Lal Vs the State of Rajasthan

Gurudayal @ Billu S/O Mansingh Vs the State of Rajasthan

Shri Balaji Cement Agency Vs M/S Suraj Sales

Deepak Soni S/O Shri Murlidhar Soni Vs the State of Rajasthan