Allowed

Parasram S/O Shri Pokhan Singh v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC7 Jul 2025CRLMB/3253/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Three accused sought bail in FIR No.662/2024 (PS Kotwali Dholpur) for offences under BNS and the Arms Act, alleging a spontaneous cross-firing incident with no dangerous injuries. The High Court, considering custody period and delay in trial, allowed bail with bonds of Rs.50,000 and two sureties.

What did the court decide?

Applicants released on bail on personal bond of Rs.50,000 each and two sureties of Rs.25,000 each, subject to appearing before the trial Court.

Parasram S/O Shri Pokhan Singh Vs State of Rajasthan — Quashing and FIR | Rajasthan HC (2025)

¶1

[2025:RJ-JP:24921]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

(1) S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 3253/2025

¶4

Parasram S/o Shri Pokhan Singh, R/o Basai Neem, Thana Kotwali, Dholpur, District Dholpur. (At Present Confined In District Jail, Dholpur)

¶5

Kanhaiya Lal S/o Shri Ramkhiladi, R/o Basai Neem, Thana Kotwali, Dholpur, District Dholpur. (At Present Confined In District Jail, Dholpur)

¶6

----Petitioners

¶7

Versus

¶8

State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

¶9

----Respondent

¶10

Connected With

¶11

(2) S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 3303/2025

¶12

Rambraj S/o Bheemsen, Aged About 24 Years, R/o Village Basaineev, Thana Kotwali, Dholpur, Raj. (At Present Confined In District Jail, Dholpur)

¶13

----Petitioner

¶14

Versus

¶15

State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

¶16

----Respondent

¶17

For Applicants	:	Mr. Anil Jain, Adv. with
		Ms. Tanisha Jain,Adv.
For Respondent	:	Mr. Jai Prakash Tiwari, Dy.G.A.
		Mr. Naresh Kumar Gupta,PP

¶18

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR

¶19

Order

¶20

07/07/2025

¶21

Matter comes up on an application No.1/2025 filed in S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.3253/2025 for early listing of the matter.

(2 of 4)

[2025:RJ-JP:24921]

[CRLMB-3253/2025]

Learned counsel for the accused-applicants seeks permission to withdraw the aforesaid application.

¶26

Accordingly, the application No.1/2025 is dismissed as withdrawn.

¶27

As these bail applications have been filed pertaining to the same FIR, they are being heard and decided by the instant common order.

¶28

These bail applications have been filed by the accusedapplicants under Section 483 of the B.N.S.S, 2023 in the matter arising out of FIR No.662/2024, registered at Police Station Kotwali Dholpur, District Dholpur for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 189(2), 109(1), 324(4), 117(2), 190 and 191(3) of B.N.S., 2023 and Sections 25-(1A) and 3 of the Arms Act, 1959 by which the bail application of the accused-applicants under Section 483 of B.N.S.S., 2023 has been dismissed.

¶29

Learned counsel for the accused-applicants submits that the accused-applicants have falsely been implicated in this case. Learned counsel also submits that in this case, the injured persons and the accused-applicants are residents of same village and the incident occurred in a spur of moment, in which both the parties suffered injures, however, no injury to any of the injured persons has been found to be dangerous to life. Learned counsel further submits that the present accused-applicant-Parasram has lodged a cross FIR, wherein after investigation, charge-sheet against the injured persons namely Manoj and Dileep and two other coaccused persons has been submitted.

[2025:RJ-JP:24921]

[CRLMB-3253/2025]

(3 of 4)

Learned counsel for the accused-applicants argues that the accused-applicants were arrested on 19.12.2024 and since then, all these accused-applicants are behind the bars. Learned counsel also argues that in these cases, the investigation and trial will take long time to conclude, therefore, the accused-applicants be granted benefit of bail.

¶34

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent-State vehemently oppose these bail applications and submit that looking to the seriousness of the offences committed by the accusedapplicants, they should not be enlarged on bail.

¶35

Heard learned counsel for the parties and also perused the material available on record. 10. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the period of custody of the accused-applicants; the fact that incident occurred in a spur of moment in which cross FIRs have been lodged and also considering the fact that the trial will take long time to conclude, but without expressing any opinion on the merits/demerits of the case, this Court deems it proper to allow these bail applications filed by the applicants.

¶36

Consequently, these bail applications filed under Section 483 of the B.N.S.S., 2023 are allowed. It is ordered that accusedapplicants namely (1) Parasram S/o Shri Pokhan Singh, (2) Kanhaiya Lal S/o Shri Ramkhiladi & (3) Rambraj S/o Bheemsen, arrested in connection with FIR No.662/2024, registered at Police Station Kotwali Dholpur, District Dholpur, will be released on bail; provided each of them furnishes personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- each and two solvent attested

(4 of 4)

[2025:RJ-JP:24921]

[CRLMB-3253/2025]

sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the trial Court. Applicants will be required to appear before that Court on all dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.

¶41

(ASHUTOSH KUMAR),J

¶42

AARZOO ARORA /16-17

Parasram S/O Shri Pokhan Singh v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Parasram S/O Shri Pokhan Singh 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 Nazma @ Nazema @ Gillu W/O Shri Deen Islam Vs the State of Rajasthan

Hemraj S/O Ramswaroop Vs the State of Rajasthan

Rohit S/O Babulal Vs State of Rajasthan

Pritam S/O Ramjilal Vs the State of Rajasthan

Rakesh S/O Nemaram Vs State of Rajasthan

Lalit Bairagi S/O Rajkumar Bairagi Vs State of Rajasthan