Krishan Kumar @ Kishan Kumar Son of Shri Ramkumar, Vs State of Rajasthan

[2026:RJ-JP:310]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 13381/2025

Krishan Kumar @ Kishan Kumar Son of Shri Ramkumar, Aged About 38 Years, Resident of Chanchal Bhatte ke piche, Bapoda, Police Thana Sadar Bhiwani, District Haryana. (Accused confined in sub Jail Sanbhar lake)

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State of Rajasthan Through Public Prosecutor.

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. NeerajSharma
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Amit Punia,PP

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN

¶11

Order

¶12

07/01/2026

¶13

This bail application under Section 483 of BNSS has been filed on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.66/2022 registered at Police Station Phulera, District Jaipur Rural for offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 452, 302 & 120B of IPC and Section 3/25 of Arms Act. After completion of investigation, police filed chargesheet in this matter.

¶14

It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel submits that petitioner is not named in the FIR. It is submitted that main allegation of causing firearm injury is against co-accused persons namely- Vivek Saini & Mandeep Singh @ Manuva @ Mannu and they have already been granted benefit of

[2026:RJ-JP:310]

[CRLMB-13381/2025]

(2 of 3)

bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court. Counsel submits that other co-accused persons namely- Khemchand Saini @ Bunty and Bharpur Singh have been granted benefit of bail by this Court and co-accused namely- Naveen Gadwal has been granted benefit of bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court. It is submitted that trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. Counsel further submits that petitioner is in custody since 13.07.2025 and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose.

¶19

Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the bail application and submits that petitioner is a habitual offender as three other cases have been registered against him.

¶20

I have considered the contentions.

¶21

Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by counsel for the petitioner, especially considering the material available on record, as also the fact that co-accused persons against whom there is allegation of causing firearm injury have already been granted benefit of bail by co-ordinate bench of this Court and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion as well as looking to the period of custody, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it fit and proper to allow this bail application.

¶22

This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner- Krishan Kumar @ Kishan Kumar Son of Shri Ramkumar shall be released on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) together with two sureties in the sum of

(3 of 3)

[2026:RJ-JP:310]

[CRLMB-13381/2025]

Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court with the stipulation that he shall appear before that Court and any court to which the matter is transferred, on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.

¶27

Considering the criminal antecedents of the petitioner, it is made clear that the petitioner shall not involve in any other offence(s) during currency of bail granted by this Court. The petitioner is further directed to mark his presence in the concerned police station in first week of every month, till trial is concluded.

¶28

Concerned SHO shall enter the attendance of the petitioner in the Roznamcha. In case the petitioner fails to mark his presence in the concerned police station, as directed above, the concerned SHO is directed to immediately report the matter to the concerned Court in this regard.

¶29

If breach of any of these conditions is reported or come to the notice of the Court, same shall alone be a reason for the trial Court to cancel the bail granted to the petitioner by this Court.

¶30

Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the concerned SHO for necessary compliance.

¶31

The observations made hereinabove are only for decision of the bail application and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner.

¶32

(ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J

¶33

LALIT MOHAN /19

Krishan Kumar @ Kishan Kumar Son of Shri Ramkumar, v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Krishan Kumar @ Kishan Kumar Son of Shri Ramkumar, 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

Prakash Dhakad S/O Shri Bhawani Dhakad Vs State of Rajasthan

Nandlal S/O Kalyan Vs State of Rajasthan

Rekha W/O Chhitar Vs State of Rajasthan

Kalyan Sahay @ Ramkalyan S/O Late Shri Badrinarayan Vs State of Rajasthan

Vijaysingh S/O Shri Ramgilas Vs State of Rajasthan

Kishan Lal Yadav Son of Sohan Lal Yadav Vs State of Rajasthan