Allowed

Ahmed S/O Subhan Khan v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC1 Sept 2026CRLMB/11514/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single bench criminal application for bail. The petitioner, an elderly man, was arrested for offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. The Court observed that no major overt acts were attributed to him. Based on his age and medical condition, the High Court allowed bail with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner enlarged on bail subject to personal bond and conditions of reporting to police and maintaining silence.

Ahmed S/O Subhan Khan Vs State of Rajasthan — Bail and Remand | Rajasthan HC (2026)

¶1

[2026:RJ-JP:35160]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 11514/2026 CNR: RJHC020691642026 | URN: CRLMB / 21247U / 2026

¶4

Ahmed S/o Subhan Khan, Aged About 70 Years, R/o Village Salpur, Police Station Pahadi, District Deeg (Rajasthan) (Presently Confined In Judicial Custody At Sub Jail Deeg).

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Surendra Singh For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vijay Singh Yadav, PP

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI CHIRANIA

¶11

Order

¶12

01/09/2026

¶13

The instant bail application has been filed by the petitioner Ahmed S/o Subhan Khan, who was arrested by the police in connection with FIR No. 108/2026 dated 16.04.2026 registered at Police Station Pahari, District Deeg for the offences punishable under Sections 189(2), 115(2), 126(2) and 74 of BNS, 2023.

¶14

Learned counsel submits that the petitioner is a 70 years old man and has not committed any offence as alleged by the complainant in the impugned FIR. He further submitted that he is medically infirm also and is behind the bars since 16.04.2026. He further submitted that there are two criminal antecedents of the year 2002 and 2020 in which he has already been enlarged on bail and investigation is almost complete and Investigating Officer will soon file the charge-sheet. In view of the above, learned counsel prays that the petitioner may be enlarged on bail.

[2026:RJ-JP:35160]

[CRLMB-11514/2026]

(2 of 3)

Learned Public Prosecutor strongly opposed the bail application, however could not dispute the fact that injuries as suffered by injured Raveena are assigned to the person Mustafa and therefore, as far as the present petitioner is concerned, no serious overt act has been assigned to him.

¶19

Heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the contents of the FIR.

¶20

This Court noted that the allegations as recorded by the complainant in the FIR in which 8 persons have been named. As per the FIR and as pointed out by the learned Public Prosecutor, four persons received injuries, out of which two persons namely Raveena and Shohil have suffered grievous injuries which are not assigned to the petitioner herein. Considering the age of the petitioner and noting that the allegations are not against the petitioner, this Court is inclined to exercise its power under Section 483 B.N.S.S. and deems it just and proper to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

¶21

Accordingly, the instant bail application filed under Section 483 B.N.S.S. is allowed and it is directed that petitioner Ahmed S/o Subhan Khan shall be released on bail, provided he executes a personal bond in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-with two sound and solvent sureties of Rs.50,000/- each to the satisfaction of learned Trial Court for his appearance before that Court on each and every date of hearing and whenever called upon to do so till the completion of the trial. The petitioner is further directed not to take undue advantage of liberty or misuse liberty. It is made clear that the observation as made by this Court in the bail application will not affect the trial of the case.

[2026:RJ-JP:35160]

[CRLMB-11514/2026]

(3 of 3)

The petitioner shall also mark his presence before the SHO of the concerned Police Station once a month for a period of one year without any fail. SHO shall mark his presence and maintain record of the same. In case the petitioner fails to mark his presence, this bail application shall stands cancelled without further reference to this Court.

¶26

(RAVI CHIRANIA),J

¶27

195/RAHUL KUMAR

Ahmed S/O Subhan Khan v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ahmed S/O Subhan Khan 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