Mahesh S/O Late Bhagwan Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

¶1

[2025:RJ-JP:35486]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 4893/2025

¶4

Mahesh S/o Late Bhagwan Singh, Aged About 55 Years, R/o Pavesura, P.s. Kanchanpur, District Dholpur (Rajasthan) (Accused Is Presently Confined In District Jail, Dholpur).

¶5

Saurabh S/o Mahesh, Aged About 20 Years, R/o Pavesura, P.s. Kanchanpur, District Dholpur (Rajasthan) (Accused Is Presently Confined In District Jail, Dholpur).

¶6

Mukesh Solanki S/o Shiv Singh, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Pavesura, P.s. Kanchanpur, District Dholpur (Rajasthan) (Accused Is Presently Confined In District Jail, Dholpur).

¶7

----Petitioners

¶8

Versus

¶9

State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

¶10

----Respondent

¶11

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Manoj Kumar Avasthi For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP For Complainant(s) : Mr. Neeraj Sharma

¶12

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order

¶13

04/09/2025

¶14

The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS on behalf of the petitioners, who have been arrested in connection with FIR No.391/2024 registered at Police Station Kanchanpur, District Dholpur (Raj.) for the offences punishable under Sections 189(2), 115(2), 126(2), 352 and 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, (in short ‘BNS’) 2023. After completion of investigation, police filed charge-sheet in this matter for the offences punishable under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 115(2), 126(2), 103(1), 109(1), 352 and 351(3) of BNS, 2023.

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that he does not want to press this bail application qua accused-petitioner No.3-

(2 of 3)

[2025:RJ-JP:35486]

[CRLMB-4893/2025]

Mukesh Solanki and seeks liberty to renew the prayer for bail in changed circumstances.

¶20

Accordingly, this bail application is dismissed as not pressed qua accused-petitioner No.3 with liberty as prayed. 4. So far as accused-petitioner Nos.1 & 2 are concerned, counsel submits that they have falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel submits that complainant of this case has been examined during the course of trial and it appears from her testimony that allegation of causing fatal injury on the head of the deceased is against co-accused Mukesh Solanki, whose bail application has been dismissed as not pressed today itself by this order. Counsel submits that there are no criminal antecedents against the petitioners and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. Counsel submits that petitioners are in custody since 28.11.2024 and further custody of the petitioners would not serve any fruitful purpose.

¶21

Learned Public Prosecutor assisted by learned counsel for the complainant vehemently opposes the submissions made by counsel for the petitioners. However, learned State Counsel fairly concedes that it appears from the Court testimony of the complainant that allegation of causing fatal injury on the head of the deceased is against co-accused Mukesh Solanki, whose bail application has been dismissed as not pressed today itself. Counsel for the complainant submits that petitioners have actively participated in commission of crime and they have caused injuries on the person of other injured persons.

¶22

I have considered the contentions.

(3 of 3)

[2025:RJ-JP:35486]

[CRLMB-4893/2025]

Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by counsel for the petitioners, especially considering the material available on record in the form of charge-sheet including Court testimony of the complainant, as also considering the fact that fatal injury on the head of deceased has been attributed to co-accused Mukesh Solanki, 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 the bail application.

¶27

This bail application is accordingly partly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioners- (1) Mahesh S/o Late Bhagwan Singh and (2) Saurabh S/o Mahesh 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.

¶28

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

¶29

(ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J

¶30

LALIT MOHAN /46

Mahesh S/O Late Bhagwan Singh v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mahesh S/O Late Bhagwan Singh 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

Ramjanm @ Lala S/O Raghunath Vs State of Rajasthan

Mukesh Kumar S/O Ramsingh Vs State of Rajasthan

Deepakchand S/O Shri Hetram Vs State of Rajasthan

Kaluram S/O Puranmal Vs State of Rajasthan

Ramniwas Naradhaniya S/O Shanker Ram Naradhaniya Vs State of Rajasthan

Vishavjeet S/O Anant Kalita Vs State of Rajasthan