Dismissed¶21

Sarjan Singh S/O Bharat Singh v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC14 Jul 2025CRLMB/8244/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Third bail application dismissed - bail refusal on ground of dangerous-to-life injury; sharp weapon injury on forehead of injured Biram; FIR No.315/2024 Police Station Manohar Thana District Jhalawar; offences under BNS Sections 126(2), 115(2), 3(5) & 352; application under Section 483 B.N.S.S.; second bail application earlier dismissed on 24.02.2025; PW-2 Dr. Arun Somani's statement that injury opined dangerous to life; petitioner Sarjan Singh confined in Sub-District Jail Aklera; advocates Mr. Manish Kumar Yadav and Mr. Amit Punia PP; Hon'ble Justice Ganesh Ram Meena; High Court of Rajasthan, Jaipur Bench; [CRLMB-8244/2025]; decided 14/07/2025.

What did the court decide?

None - bail refused; petitioner not enlarged on bail. ¶21

Sarjan Singh S/O Bharat Singh Vs State of Rajasthan — Bail and Remand | Rajasthan HC (2025)

¶1

[2025:RJ-JP:25997]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Misc. 3rd Bail Application No. 8244/2025

¶4

Sarjan Singh S/o Bharat Singh, Aged About 23 Years, R/o Bishan Kheda Police Station Manohar Thana, District Jhalawar (Raj.) ( At Present Confined In Sub-District Jail Aklera, District Jhalawar, ( Raj.)

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State of Rajasthan, through PP

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Manish Kumar Yadav For Respondent(s) : Mr. Amit Punia, PP

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA Order

¶11

14/07/2025

¶12

This third bail application has been filed by the petitioner under Section 483 of the B.N.S.S. arising out of FIR No.315/2024, registered with the Police Station Manohar Thana, District Jhalawar for offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 3(5) & 352 of BNS.

¶13

Heard and considered.

¶14

The second bail application of the accused petitioner was dismissed vide order dated 24.02.2025 after taking into consideration the specific allegation of causing injury to the injured Biram by sharp weapon on the forehead which has been opined to be dangerous to life by the doctor.

¶15

Learned counsel for the accused petitioner submits that the doctor, who has given opinion with regard to injury, has been examined before the trial Court.

[2025:RJ-JP:25997]

[CRLMB-8244/2025]

(2 of 2)

In the statement of PW.2 Dr. Arun Somani, he has stated that the injury caused to the injured Biram has been opined by him as dangerous to life.

¶20

Taking into consideration the specific allegation against the accused petitioner of causing injury on the forehead of the injured Biram so also the evidence of the Doctor, who has given opinion that the said injury is dangerous to life, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the accused petitioner on bail.

¶21

Accordingly, this third bail application is dismissed.

¶22

(GANESH RAM MEENA),J

¶23

Gaurav Srivastava /4

Sarjan Singh S/O Bharat Singh v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sarjan Singh S/O Bharat 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

Anil Kumar S/O Late Shri Ramsharan Sharma, Vs Shri Bharthari Lok Sewa Trust

Mali Devi W/O Late Narayan Ram Vs Ranvir Singh S/O Kishor Singh

Daulat Ram Vs Bhawani Singh Meena and Ors.

Satish Kumar Saini S/O Anandi Lal Saini Vs Dhoop Singh Rajput Son of Karan Pal Singh

Jamshed S/O Sirdar Vs State of Rajasthan

Smt. Kamli Devi Wife of Late Shri Brijmohan Vs Mahesh Kumar S/O Jhutharam Yadav