Mangal S/O Dudha v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC24 Mar 2026CRLAS/370/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench; S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 370/2026; bail on parity with co-accused; appeal under Section 14 SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act; rejection of Section 483 BNSS bail application set aside; FIR No. 144/2025, P.S. R.K. Puram, Kota City; BNS Sections 126(2), 115(2), 117(2), 109(1), 189(2) read with 190 and 191(2); SC/ST Act Section 3(2)(v); personal bond Rs. 50,000; two sureties Rs. 25,000 each; Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand; decided 24.03.2026.

What did the court decide?

Release of the accused-appellant on bail subject to furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties of Rs. 25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court, with stipulation to appear before that Court on all dates of hearing and as and when called upon. ¶¶20

Mangal S/O Dudha Vs State of Rajasthan — Bail and Remand | Rajasthan HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶20

Issue for consideration

Whether the appellant, whose case is at par with co-accused Mukeshram @ Lala, Mahaveer Gurjar, Mukesh Gurjar and Sanwariya @ Sanwra who were already granted bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, is entitled to the same bail indulgence notwithstanding rejection of his bail application by the Special Judge.

¶¶16

Court's answer

Since bail indulgence had already been extended to the co-accused by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court and the appellant's case is at par with theirs, the same indulgence is extended to the appellant.

¶¶19

Ratio / Principle

The appeal is allowed; the impugned order of the Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Kota is set aside and the accused-appellant shall be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties of Rs. 25,000/- each, with stipulation to appear before the Trial Court on all dates of hearing.

¶¶20

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail — Parity with co-accused. S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 370/2026 under Section 14 of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act filed by Mangal, in custody in FIR No. 144/2025, Police Station R.K. Puram, Kota City (offences under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 117(2), 109(1), 189(2) each read with 190, and 191(2) BNS, and Section 3(2)(v) SC/ST Act), against rejection of his Section 483 BNSS bail application by the Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Kota (order dated 31.01.2026). Counsel urged that bail had already been granted to co-accused Mukeshram @ Lala, Mahaveer Gurjar, Mukesh Gurjar and Sanwariya @ Sanwra by a Co-ordinate Bench and the appellant's case was at par; the Public Prosecutor could not controvert. The Court extended the same indulgence, allowed the appeal, set aside the impugned order, and directed release on a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties of Rs. 25,000/- each. (Anoop Kumar Dhand, J.; 24.03.2026.)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 370/2026

¶3

Mangal S/o Dudha, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Village Daulatganj, Thana R K Puram, Kota City (At Present Accused Confined In Central Jail Kota).

¶4

----Appellant

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor.

¶7

Vijay Bheel S/o Gopal Bhell, R/o Near Mobile Tower, Bheel Basti Nyaganv, R K Puram Kota City, Rajasthan

¶8

----Respondents

¶9

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Shivraj Chauhan For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S.Dhakar-PP

¶10

JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order

¶11

24/03/2026

¶12

The instant appeal has been filed under Section 14 of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act on behalf of the appellant, who is in custody in connection with FIR No. 144/2025, registered at the Police Station R.K. Puram, District Kota City for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2) read with 190, 115(2) read with 190, 117(2) read with 190, 109(1) read with 190 and 189(2) read with 190, and 191(2) of the BNS and Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act against the order dated 31.01.2026 passed by the Court of the Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Kota, whereby, the bail application preferred under Section 483 BNSS on behalf of the appellant was rejected.

¶13

Counsel for the appellant submits that as per the statements of the injured PW1 Vijesh @ Vijay, all the accused Mukesh Gurjar, Sanwariya @ Sanwra and the appellant assaulted him. Counsel

¶14

[CRLAS-370/2026]

¶15

(2 of 2)

¶16

submits that indulgence of bail has already been granted to the co-accused Mukeshram @ Lala, Mahaveer Gurjar, Mukesh Gurjar and Sanwariya @ Sanwra by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court and the case of the appellant is at par with them. Hence, the appellant is also entitled to get the same indulgence.

¶17

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposes the arguments raised by counsel for the appellant but he is not in a position to controvert the aforesaid submission.

¶18

Heard. Perused the material available on record.

¶19

Considering the arguments put forward by learned counsel for the appellant and looking to the fact that indulgence of the bail has already been extended to the co-accused Mukeshram @ Lala, Mahaveer Gurjar, Mukesh Gurjar and Sanwariya @ Sanwra by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court and the case of the present petitioner is at par with them. Hence, the same indulgence is also extended to the appellant.

¶20

Consequently, the instant appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated 30.01.2026 passed by the Court of the Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Kota is set aside. It is ordered that the accused–appellant Mangal S/o Dudha arrested in connection with the aforesaid FIR shall be released on bail; provided he 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 to appear before that Court on all dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.

¶21

(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J

¶22

Ashu/Puneet/61

Mangal S/O Dudha v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mangal S/O Dudha 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

Ramdin Khinchi S/O Shri Devilal B/C Balai Vs State of Rajasthan

Mahendra Gurjar Son of Roodmal Vs State of Rajasthan

Smt Neetu Sharma Vs Bhawani Mudgal

Ramhet S/O Dwarakilal Vs State of Rajasthan

Ghanshyam S/O Nandlal, Vs State of Rajasthan

Mr. Nitesh Saxena S/O Shri Ajay Saxena Vs State of Rajasthan