Allowed

Dudaram S/O Pusaram v. the State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC3 Sept 2026CRLMB/13697/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed bail applications for Moinuddin and Dudaram in a case involving offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. The court noted they were falsely implicated as witnesses, investigation was complete, and no other criminal antecedents existed.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners directed to be released on bail upon executing personal bond of ₹1,00,000 each with two sureties of ₹50,000 each.

Dudaram S/O Pusaram Vs the State of Rajasthan — Bail and Remand | Rajasthan HC (2026)

¶1

[2026:RJ-JP:35803]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 13153/2026 CNR: RJHC020810272026 | URN: CRLMB / 24291U / 2026

¶4

Moinuddin S/o Safi Mohammad, Aged About 65 Years, R/o Nimbaz, Police Station Jaitaran, District Beawar (At Present Confined At Sub Jail Beawar)

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p.

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

Connected With

¶10

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 13697/2026 CNR: RJHC020828252026 | URN: CRLMB / 25387U / 2026

¶11

Dudaram S/o Pusaram, Aged About 50 Years, R/o Near Bus Stand Loloti, Police Station Jaitaran, District Beawar. (At Present In District Jail, Beawar).

¶12

----Petitioner

¶13

Versus

¶14

The State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶15

----Respondent

¶16

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pradeep Mathur For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vijay Singh Yadav, P.P. Mr. Surjeet Tholia, CI, SHO, Saket Nagar, Beawar

¶17

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI CHIRANIA

¶18

Order

¶19

03/09/2026

¶20

These criminal misc. bail applications have been filed by the petitioners - Moinuddin S/o Safi Mohammad and Dudaram S/o Pusaram, under Section 483 of B.N.S.S., 2023, who were arrested by the Police in connection with the FIR bearing No.165/2026 dated 13.05.2026 registered at Police Station Saket Nagar, District

[2026:RJ-JP:35803]

[CRLMB-13153/2026]

(2 of 3)

Beawar for the offences punishable under Sections 316(2), 318(4), 336(3), 340(2) & 61(2) of B.N.S., 2023.

¶25

Learned counsel submits that the petitioners have falsely been implicated in the present case. Learned counsel submits that the accused Hanuman Singh has done the entire conspiracy and was also associated with the main accused Salman. Learned counsel submits that the petitioners acted as witnesses in the present case. Learned counsel further submits that no further interrogation is required from the petitioner as the investigation is complete and they are behind the bars since 08.08.2026. In view thereof, learned counsel prays that the petitioner may be enlarged on bail, as the trial will take sufficiently long time to conclude.

¶26

Learned Public Prosecutor strongly opposes the bail application, however, could not refute the fact that there are no serious criminal antecedents against the accused-petitioners, the police has completed the investigation and the entire conspiracy is done by accused Hanuman.

¶27

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the contents of the FIR. 5. This Court, after considering the nature of allegations, investigation is complete, trial will take sufficiently long time, petitioners have no direct role in the present case, and without commenting upon merits of the case, is inclined to exercise its powers under Section 483 B.N.S.S. and deems it just and proper to enlarge the accused-petitioners on bail.

¶28

Accordingly, the bail applications filed under Section 483 B.N.S.S. are allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioners Moinuddin S/o Safi Mohammad & Dudaram S/o Pusaram

[2026:RJ-JP:35803]

[CRLMB-13153/2026]

(3 of 3)

shall be released on bail, provided each of them execute a personal bond in a sum of ₹1,00,000/- each with two sound and solvent sureties of ₹50,000/- each to the satisfaction of learned trial Court for their 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 petitioners are 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 applications will not affect the trial of the case.

¶33

It is further directed that in case, the petitioners are found to be involved in any case within two years from the date of passing of this order, learned Public prosecutor shall file an application for cancellation of the bail.

¶34

(RAVI CHIRANIA),J

¶35

160-161/Monika

Dudaram S/O Pusaram v. the State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dudaram S/O Pusaram 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