Amir Khan S/O Ateek Khan Vs State of Rajasthan

¶1

[2026:RJ-JP:6055]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Appeal (Sb) No. 184/2026

¶4

Amir Khan S/o Ateek Khan, Aged About 27 Years, R/oSaiyad Kirana Store Ke Pass, Ek Minar Maszid Ke Pass, Chhawani, P.S. Gumanpura, Kota. (At Present Confined In Central Jail Kota)

¶5

Nabeel Abbasi @ Nabbu S/o Saleem Abbasi, Aged About 23 Years, R/o- Baba Ke Chabutre Ke Upar, Bhistipada, Shripura, Gumanpura, Kota City. (At Present Confined In Central Jail Kota)

¶6

----Appellants

¶7

Versus

¶8

State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor. 2. Nandini Davriya D/o Vijay Kumar, R/o- Hardol Baba Mandir Ke Pas, Bhati Chowk, Chhawani, Gumanpura, Kota City (Raj.).

¶9

----Respondents

¶10

For Appellant(s)	: Mr. Samarth Sharma
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Jitendra Singh Rathore, PP
	Mr. Paras Jain, counsel for the complainant

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP TANEJA

¶12

Order

¶13

09/02/2026

¶14

The present Criminal Appeal has been filed by the accusedappellants under Section 14(A)(2) of S.C. and S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, in connection with F.I.R. No.30/2026 registered at Police Station Gumanpura, District Kota City for the offence(s) punishable under Section(s) 126(2), 115(2), 109(1), 189(2), 331(2), 191(2), 191(3), 190 of B.N.S and Section(s) 3(1)(r)(s), 3(2)(v) and 3(2)(va) of S.C. and S.T. Act.

[2026:RJ-JP:6055]

[CRLAS-184/2026]

(2 of 3)

Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the appellants have been falsely implicated in this case as they have nothing to do with the alleged offences. Counsel further submits that neither there exist any allegation against the appellants nor they are named in the FIR. Counsel also submits that specific allegations for inflicting the injury on the injured person exists against Sohil and Arman, and the injury caused to the injured person is simple in nature. He further submits that appellants are in custody since long; no recovery is required to be made from the appellants and conclusion of trial will take considerable time, so no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the appellants into custody, and therefore prays to enlarge the appellants on bail.

¶19

Learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the complainant oppose the submissions made by learned counsel for the appellants hereinabove.

¶20

Heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the material available on record. 5. Taking into consideration the overall facts & circumstances of the case; the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the appellants; the appellants’ names are not mentioned in the FIR; specific allegations of inflicting injury are levelled against the other co-accused, as well as trial will take considerable time in its conclusion, this Court is of the opinion that the appellant deserves to be enlarged on bail.

¶21

Consequently, the instant appeal is allowed . The impugned order dated 22.01.2026 passed by the Special Court, SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Kota, in Criminal Bail Application

[CRLAS-184/2026]

[2026:RJ-JP:6055]

(3 of 3)

No. 30/2026, is set aside. It is ordered that the accusedappellants, namely namely Amir Khan S/o Ateek Khan and Nabeel Abbasi @ Nabbu S/o Saleem Abbasi, arrested in connection with aforesaid F.I.R. , shall be released on bail, if not wanted in any other case, provided each of them furnishes a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- and two sureties of Rs. 25,000/each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court with the following conditions:-

¶26

(i) The accused-appellants shall not tamper with evidence or influence the witness in any manner.

¶27

(ii) The accused-appellants shall not indulge in any criminal activity and shall not repeat any criminal offence punishable under the Law.

¶28

(iii) The accused-appellants shall attend the hearing of the Trial Court on the date fixed by the Trial Court or as and when asked to appear before the Trial Court.

¶29

(iv) In case of any violation of above conditions, the bail granted to the accused-appellants shall be liable to be cancelled.

¶30

(SANDEEP TANEJA),J

¶31

AVINASH GULERIA /68

Amir Khan S/O Ateek Khan v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amir Khan S/O Ateek Khan 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

Ravi Sain S/O Shyam Prakash Vs State of Rajasthan

Sher Singh @ Subash S/O Dataram Vs State of Rajasthan

Sabir S/O Shri Deenu Khan Vs State of Rajasthan

Rohit Nagar S/O Nandkishore Vs State of Rajasthan

Arbaj Khan Son of Usman Vs State of Rajasthan

Arshad Ali Khan S/O Mohammad Miya Musalman Vs State of Rajasthan