Deepak S/O Chhitarmal Vs the State of Rajasthan

[2026:RJ-JP:5601]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous IInd Bail Application No. 1923/2026

Deepak S/o Chhitarmal, Aged About 22 Years, R/o Chiravandya Dhani, Tan Aluda, Police Station, Papadada, District Dausa (Rajasthan) (At Present Petitioner Is Confined In District Jail, Dausa).

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

	Versus
The State Of Rajasthan,	Through Pp ----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) :	Mr. Rahul Sharma with Ms. Chanchal,Mr. Utkarsh Goyal
For Respondent(s) :	Ms. Manju Dave,PP

¶7

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAMIL KUMAR MATHUR

¶8

Order

¶9

06/02/2026

¶10

The petitioner has preferred this IInd bail application under Section 483 of BNSS in FIR No.182/2024 registered at Police Station Papadada, District Dausa for offences under Sections 103(1) and 85 of BNS, 2023.

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Public Prosecutor and perused the material available on record. 3. He submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present matter. He again submits that the petitioner has not been named in the FIR. The petitioner has been implicated in the present case on false and concocted grounds. He submits that although there is an allegation that the present petitioner assisted the co-accused in committing the murder of the deceased Puja but at the time of the so-called incident, the petitioner was not

[2026:RJ-JP:5601]

[CRLMB-1923/2026]

(2 of 3)

present at the place of the alleged incident. He further submits that there is no incriminating or connecting material on record from which the involvement of the petitioner can be inferred. He submits that the statements of the Investigating Officer and other material witnesses from PW-1 to PW-9, have already been recorded and the prosecution has failed to bring any positive evidence on record against the present petitioner which connects him with alleged offence. He averred that the sole eye-witness Golu Meena, has not supported the prosecution case. He again submits that similarly situated co-accused Lokesh Kumar has been enlarged on bail by this Court on 24.01.2026. The case of the petitioner is at par with him. Petitioner is behind the bars since 04.12.2024. The trial of the case will take considerable time, therefore, no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner in further custody and on the ground with parity with similarly situated person, the bail application of the petitioner may be allowed.

¶16

Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application. 5. On consideration of the rival submissions and material available on record and in light of submission made on behalf of petitioner but without expressing any opinion on merits/demerits of the case, I am inclined to grant benefit of bail to the petitioner. 6. Consequently, the IInd bail application under Section 483 B.N.S.S. is allowed and it is directed that the petitioner Deepak S/o Chhitarmal, be released on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial

¶17

(3 of 3) [CRLMB-1923/2026]

¶18

[2026:RJ-JP:5601]

¶19

court with the stipulation that he shall appear before that Court on all subsequent dates of hearing till conclusion of the trial.

¶20

(PRAMIL KUMAR MATHUR),J

¶21

Chandan/5

Deepak S/O Chhitarmal v. the State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Deepak S/O Chhitarmal 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

Bharat Lal Meena S/O Shri Laxmi Narayan Vs State of Rajasthan

Dr Subash Mahala Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Prabhakar Kumar S/O Ramker Vs State of Rajasthan

Gyarsilal Kumawat S/O Ramdev Kumawat Vs the State of Rajasthan

Anant Badila S/O Shri Nemichand Meena Vs State of Rajasthan

Raghuveer Singh S/O Late Shri Mohan Singh Vs State of Rajasthan