Dhanraj S/O Kishanlal Vs State of Rajasthan

¶1

[2026:RJ-JP:1057]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 335/2026

¶4

Dhanraj S/o Kishanlal, R/o Narayanpura, Kherkheda Gusai, Police Station Chhabra, District Baran. (At Present Confined In Sub Jail Chhabra, District Baran).

¶5

Vishnu S/o Ghanshyam, R/o Narayanpura, Kherkheda Gusai, Police Station Chhabra, District Baran. (At Present Confined In Sub Jail Chhabra, District Baran).

¶6

Samudra S/o Ghanshyam, R/o Narayanpura, Kherkheda Gusai, Police Station Chhabra, District Baran. (At Present Confined In Sub Jail Chhabra, District Baran).

¶7

Lalit S/o Kishanlal, R/o Narayanpura, Kherkheda Gusai, Police Station Chhabra, District Baran. (At Present Confined In Sub Jail Chhabra, District Baran).

¶8

----Petitioners

¶9

Versus

¶10

State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

¶11

----Respondent

¶12

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. Mukesh Pal Jadoun, Mr. AnuragChauhan
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Rajesh Choudhary, GA-cum-AAG, Mr. Manvendra Singh,PP

¶13

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR

¶14

Order

¶15

12/01/2026

¶16

The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 BNSS on behalf of accused-petitioners. The petitioners have been arrested in connection with FIR No.304/2025 registered at Police Station Chhabra, District Baran for the offence(s) under Sections 189(2), 115(2), 126(2), 109(1) and 324(2) of BNS.

¶17

Learned counsel for the accused-petitioners submits that the accused-petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. He

(2 of 3)

[2026:RJ-JP:1057]

[CRLMB-335/2026]

further submits that the allegation against the petitioners and other co-accused are omnibus in nature. The other co-accused Leela Bai, Ramnathi Bai, Amri Bai, Sheela Bai and Reena Bai have already been enlarged on bail by the co-ordinate Bench vide order dated 19.12.2025. The accused-petitioners are in custody since long and trial of the case may take considerable time, therefore, the bail application of the accused-petitioners may be allowed.

¶22

Learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposes the bail application and contended that the petitioners along with the other co-accused caused injuries to the injured Kailash, Mungilal and Manbhar Bai, and Kailash injury at his head and legs which were found to be grievous in nature. There are criminal antecedents against the co-accused Dhanraj, Vishnu and Samudra, therefore, the bail application of the accused-petitioners may be dismissed.

¶23

Heard and perused the material available on record. 5. Considering the fact that the other similarly placed coaccused have already been enlarged on bail and apart from the single head injury, there is no injury at the vital part of the other injured, I deem it just and proper to enlarge the accusedpetitioners on bail.

¶24

Accordingly, the bail application under Section 483 BNSS is allowed and it is ordered that the accused-petitioners namely: 1. Dhanraj S/o Kishanlal, 2. Vishnu S/o Ghanshyam, 3.

¶25

Samudra S/o Ghanshyam and 4. Lalit S/o Kishanlal, in connection with FIR No.304/2025 registered at Police Station Chhabra, District Baran shall be enlarged on bail provided they

[CRLMB-335/2026]

[2026:RJ-JP:1057]

(3 of 3)

furnish a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for their appearance before the court concerned on all the dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.

¶30

The accused-petitioners namely: 1. Dhanraj, 2. Vishnu and 3. Samudra are also directed to mark their presence on 25^th of every month till conclusion of trial before the concerned police station. The SHO of the concerned police station is directed to maintain a regular register marking the presence of the accusedpetitioners and shall send the presence report of the accusedpetitioners on the same day to the concerned Trial Court without any delay. In case of any breach to the above condition, the learned Public Prosecutor shall be free to move the application against the petitioners for cancellation of the bail before the concerned Court.

¶31

(PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J

¶32

Keshav/150

Dhanraj S/O Kishanlal v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dhanraj S/O Kishanlal 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

Govind Narayan Sharma S/O Birdichand Sharma Vs State of Rajasthan

Sanu Nama Son Ofs Hri Kailash Chand Vs State of Rajasthan

Ajeet Kumar S/O Shri Giriraj Prasad B/C Brahmin Vs State of Rajasthan

Bamboo Khan S/O Shri Supeda @ Sufed Vs State of Rajasthan

Sheeshram S/O Shri Munsi Vs the State of Rajasthan

Lachcho W/O Munshiram Vs State of Rajasthan