Shahajaha Khatoon @ Shajiya W/O Jaan Mohammad Vs the State of Rajasthan

[2026:RJ-JP:19935]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Second Bail Application No. 2293/2026

Shahajaha Khatoon @ Shajiya wife of Jaan Mohammad, resident of E-Maten Colony No.6, Police Station Ghuchayi, District Pilibhit (U.P.) presently Tenant Plot No. 43, Green City IV Extension, Sarna Dungar, Police Station Kardhani, District Jaipur (Rajasthan) presently confined in Women Reformative Center, Jaipur.

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Rajasthan through Public Prosecutor

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. DheerajSinghal
For Respondent(s)	: Ms. Manju Dave,PP

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order

¶11

12/05/2026

¶12

This second bail application under Section 483 of BNSS has been filed on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.493/2024 registered at Police Station Kardhani, District Jaipur (West) (Rajasthan) for offences punishable under Sections 302 & 201 of the IPC. After completion of investigation, police filed charge-sheet in this matter for offences punishable under Sections 302, 201 & 34 of the IPC.

¶13

The first bail application filed on behalf of the petitioner was dismissed as withdrawn by this Court vide order dated 16.09.2025 while giving liberty to renew the prayer for bail after recording the testimony of Investigating Officer. Now, Investigating Officer as well as other witnesses have been examined during the course of trial thus, this second bail application has been filed on behalf of the petitioner.

(2 of 3)

[2026:RJ-JP:19935]

[CRLMB-2293/2026]

It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel submits that according to the testimony of the Investigating Officer, petitioner was arrested on the basis of statement given by witnesses namely, Suraj, Draupadi @ Pooja and Poonam. It is submitted that the witness namely, Poonam has not supported the prosecution case and she has been declared hostile. Counsel submits that although witness Suraj supported the prosecution case in his examination-in-chief, but he levelled such allegations only on the basis of information given by his wife Draupadi @ Pooja. Further, he did not make any allegation against the petitioner during his cross-examination. Counsel submits that the witness Draupadi @ Pooja, in her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C, alleged that the petitioner had informed her about the murder of her husband however, her testimony recorded during the course of trial would reveal that she has not alleged anything against the petitioner with regard to the alleged extrajudicial confession purportedly made by the petitioner before her. Counsel submits that there is bleak chance of culmination of trial in near future as till date, only fourteen witnesses have been examined out of twenty five cited prosecution witnesses. Counsel further submits that the petitioner who is female is in custody since 09.05.2024 and as such, she has already suffered incarceration of two years and no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping her behind the bars.

¶18

Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions advanced on behalf of the petitioner. She submits that there is serious

[2026:RJ-JP:19935]

[CRLMB-2293/2026]

(3 of 3)

allegation against the petitioner of committing murder of her husband as she was maintaining illicit relations with the coaccused.

¶23

I have considered the contentions.

¶24

Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced at bar, especially considering the fact that petitioner is a female and she is languishing in jail since 09.05.2024, as also considering the fact that till date, only fourteen witnesses have been examined out of twenty five cited prosecution witnesses, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it fit and proper to allow the second bail application.

¶25

This second bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner- Shahajaha Khatoon @ Shajiya wife of Jaan Mohammad shall be released on bail provided she furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court with the stipulation that she 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.

¶26

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.

¶27

(ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J

¶28

LALIT MOHAN /5

Shahajaha Khatoon @ Shajiya W/O Jaan Mohammad v. the State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shahajaha Khatoon @ Shajiya W/O Jaan Mohammad 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

Information and Public Relation Officer Vs Inder Singh S/O Shri Sohan Lal

Deputy Forest Conservator Vs Kamal S/O Shri Prannath Mehta

Harbhan Singh Son of Shri Bhim Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Surendra Singh S/O Late Captain Bhanwar Singh Vs the Chairman, Management Committee

Jitendra Kumar Meena S/O Shri Mukti Lal Meena Vs State of Rajasthan

Chhotu Ram Meena and Anr. Vs R S R T C and Ors.