Amit Sharma S/O Late Vijay Ratan Sharma Vs the State of Rajasthan

[2026:RJ-JP:1496]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 16129/2025

Amit Sharma S/o Late Vijay Ratan Sharma, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Brijlal Nagar, Behind Anaaj Mandi, Police Station Malpura, District Tonk, Present Tenant Of Jagdish Kumar Swami House No. 1, Kashi Nagar, Behind Benaad Station, Benaad Road, Police Station Harmada, Jaipur West. (Accused Is Presently Confined In Central Jail, Jaipur).

¶5

----Accused-Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner(s)	:	Mr. Mohit Balwada,Adv.
For Respondent(s)	:	Mr. Vivek Choudhary, PP and
		Mr. Rajesh Gadwal, Adv., for complainant.

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN

¶11

Order

¶12

13/01/2026

¶13

The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.303/2025 registered at Police Station Sadar Jaipur, District Jaipur (West) for offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 336(3), 338, 340(2) and 61(2) of BNS, 2023. After completion of investigation, police filed charge sheet in this matter.

¶14

It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Learned counsel submits that it is alleged in the FIR that in another case registered against the petitioner, bail was granted to

[CRLMB-16129/2025]

[2026:RJ-JP:1496]

(2 of 3)

him and while furnishing the bail bonds and sureties, the petitioner produced a bogus surety. He further submits that alleged offences are triable by Magistrate. He argues that trial of the case will take considerable time in its conclusion. He contends that the petitioner is in custody since 02.11.2025 and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose.

¶19

Learned Public Prosecutor assisted by learned counsel for the complainant vehemently opposes the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that there is serious allegation against the petitioner that upon grant of bail in another matter, he produced a bogus surety before the learned trial Court. 4. I have considered the contentions. 5. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner, especially the fact that alleged offences are triable by Magistrate; charge-sheet has been filed and trial will take 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 proper to allow the bail application.

¶20

This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner– Amit Sharma S/o Late Vijay Ratan Sharma shall be released on bail provided, he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakh Only) together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.2,50,000/(Rupees Two Lakh and Fifty Thousand Only) each, out of which, one must be furnished by his family member/close relative, to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court with the stipulation that he

[2026:RJ-JP:1496]

[CRLMB-16129/2025]

(3 of 3)

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.

¶25

Considering the nature of allegation, it is made clear that the accused-petitioner shall not involve in any other offence(s) during currency of the bail and he shall mark his presence in first week of every month in the concerned police station, till trial is concluded. 8. Concerned SHO shall record the presence of the petitioner in 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.

¶26

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

¶27

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

¶28

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

¶29

(ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J

¶30

MADAN/45

Amit Sharma S/O Late Vijay Ratan Sharma v. the State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amit Sharma S/O Late Vijay Ratan Sharma v. the 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

Jitendra Singh Shekhawat Vs State of Rajasthan

Aryan S/O Parshuram, Vs State of Rajasthan

Narayani Devi Alias Seema Wife of Sumer Vs State of Rajasthan

Khubiram S/O Bhagwat, Vs State of Rajasthan

Chaturbhuj S/O Bhagwanaram Vs the State of Rajasthan

Ravi Nayak S/O Omprakash Vs State of Rajasthan