Dismissed

Mukesh Kumar S/O Vidhyadhar Singh v. the State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC1 Sept 2026CRLMB/12986/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court refused to grant bail to the applicant who falsely incriminated three persons. Relying on the principle that the applicant's statements were not truthful, the court held that appointing counsel, collecting evidence of the accused, and seeking witness statements via summons proceedings were not sufficient grounds for granting bail in the current instance.

What did the court decide?

Application dismissed; bail denied; order passed accordingly.

Mukesh Kumar S/O Vidhyadhar Singh Vs the State of Rajasthan — Bail and Remand | Rajasthan HC (2026)

¶1

[2026:RJ-JP:35255]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 12986/2026 CNR: RJHC020801782026 | URN: CRLMB / 24018U / 2026

¶4

Mukesh Kumar S/o Vidhyadhar Singh, Aged About 47 Years, R/o Village Badusar, Post Roru Badi, Police Station Laxmangarh, District Sikar. (At Present In Central Jail, Jaipur)

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. SanjayKhedar
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. S.R.Dhakad,PP

¶10

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SHUBHA MEHTA Judgment / Order

¶11

01/09/2026

¶12

izkFkhZ@vfHk;qDr dh vksj ls tekur dk ;g izkFkZuk&i= /kkjk 483 Hkkjrh; ukxfjd lqj{kk lafgrk ds varxZr iqfyl Fkkuk t;iqj ,;jiksVZ ftyk t;iqj flVh iwoZ esa ntZ izFke lwpuk fjiksVZ la[;k 80@2026 vijk/k varxZr /kkjk 61¼2½] 318¼4½] 338] 336¼3½] 340¼2½ Hkkjrh; U;k; lafgrk esa tekur dk ykHk fn, tkus dh izkFkZuk ds lkFk is'k fd;k x;k gSA

¶13

cgl lquh xbZA

¶14

fo}ku vf/koDrk izkFkhZ@vfHk;qDr dk rdZ gS fd izkFkhZ dks izdj.k esa feF;k lafyIr fd;k x;k gSA mudk rdZ gS fd izkFkhZ@vfHk;qDr }kjk rks dsoy VªSoy ,tsalh pykbZ tkrh gS ftlds varxZr mlus rhu O;fDr tks fd etnwj Fks] ds fons'k tkus ds fVdV ek= gh cuok, Fks ,oa fons'k ;k=k djus esa mudh enn dh FkhA mudk rdZ gS fd izkFkhZ ds fo:) iwoZ esa dsoy ,d izdj.k ekjihV ls lEcfU/kr ntZ Fkk] ftlesa mls nks"keqDr fd;k tk pqdk gSA mudk rdZ gS fd ftu O;fDr;ksa ds V~;wfjLV ohtk cuokdj fons'k Hkstus ds iz;kl dk ml ij vk{ksi gS] mu rhuksa O;fDr;ksa dks fopkj.k U;k;ky; us tekur ij eqDr dj fn;k gSA izkFkhZ@vfHk;qDr

(2 of 2)

[2026:RJ-JP:35255]

[CRLMB-12986/2026]

fnukad 07-08-2026 ls vfHkj{kk esa gSA vUos"k.k ,oa vUoh{kk esa le; yxsxkA vr% izkFkhZ dks tekur dk ykHk fn;k tk,A

¶19

blds foijhr fo}ku yksd vfHk;kstd dk rdZ gS fd izkFkhZ@vfHk;qDr us Vªsoy ,ts.V cudj rhu O;fDr;ksa dks V~;wfjLV ohtk cuokdj fn;k tcfd mudk iwoZ ls gh eYVhiy ohtk cuk gqvk Fkk vkSj bl izdkj ls V~;wfjLV ohtk dwVjfpr djds nsus dk vkjksi gSA vHkh vUos"k.k iw.kZ ugha gqvk gS] vr% tekur dk ykHk ugha fn;k tk,A

¶20

i=koyh ds voyksdu ls izdV gksrk gS fd izkFkhZ@vfHk;qDr ij ftu rhu etnwjksa ds dwVjfpr rjhds ls V~;wqfjLV ohtk cuokus dk vkjksi gS mUgsa bl gsrq eYVhiy ohtk dh tkudkjh fNikrs gq, dsoy QthZ V~;wfjLV ohtk is'k dj bfexzs'ku Dyh;jasl izkIr djus gsrq funsZf'kr Hkh fd;k x;k FkkA izkFkhZ@vfHk;qDr ij rhu O;fDr;ksa ds ikl eYVhiy ohtk gksrs gq, Hkh QthZ V~;wfjLV ohtk cuokdj mUgsa voS/k :i ls fons'k ;k=k djkus ds iz;kl dk vfHk;ksx gSA ekeys esa vHkh vuqla/kku iw.kZ ugha gqvk gSA vr% izdj.k ds leLr rF;ksa] ifjfLFkfr;ksa dks ns[krs gq, izdj.k ds bl Lrj ij izkFkhZ@vfHk;qDr dks tekur dk ykHk fn;k tkuk mfpr izrhr ugha gksrk gSA

¶21

ifj.kker% izkFkhZ@vfHk;qDr dh vksj ls izLrqr tekur dk ;g izkFkZuk&i= vLohdkj dj fujLr fd;k tkrk gSA

¶22

(SHUBHA MEHTA),J

¶23

81/AJAY KUMAR SINGHAL

Mukesh Kumar S/O Vidhyadhar Singh v. the State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mukesh Kumar S/O Vidhyadhar Singh v. the 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