Dharamraj @ Dharma S/O Om Prakash Vs the State of Rajasthan

1. Sangram Singh Urf Sonu S/o Raghuraj Singh, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Hadon Ka Pipalda Thana Talera, District Bundi (Rajasthan) (At Present Accused Confined In Sub Jail Bundi)

¶13

Akhraj Singh @ Bittu Bana S/o Raghuraj Singh, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Hadon Ka Pipalda Thana Talera, District Bundi (Rajasthan) (At Present Accused Confined In Sub Jail Bundi)

¶14

----Petitioners

¶15

Versus

¶16

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶17

----Respondent

¶18

For Petitioner(s)	: Ms. Harshita Sharma for
	Dr. Mahesh Sharma
	Mr. Narendra Singh Shekhawat
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Rhishi RajSingh Rathore,PP

¶19

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN

Order

02/04/2026

[2026:RJ-JP:13863]

[CRLMB-3942/2026]

(2 of 3)

The instant second bail applications have been filed under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 on behalf of the accusedapplicants. The accused-applicants were arrested in connection with FIR No. 100/2025 registered at Police Station Talera, District Bundi for the offence(s) under Sections 103(1) and 189(2) of the BNS, 2023.

¶26

Learned counsel for the accused-applicants has submitted that there is material change in circumstances since the rejection of the first bail applications. It is submitted that PW-5 and PW-7, who are the concerned medical officers/doctors, have not supported the prosecution story during their testimonies before the learned Trial Court. It is further submitted that the testimony of PW-4, namely Dhanraj, who was cited as a material witness, is also not supportive of the case of the prosecution.

¶27

Per contra , learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the second bail applications. It is submitted that the alleged offences are heinous and grave in nature and that the criminal antecedents of the applicants were already duly considered during the rejection of the prior application. It is further submitted that the victim sustained multiple injuries, out of which one was noted to be fatal and life-threatening in nature which caused death of the victim.

¶28

Having heard the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties and upon assiduous perusal of the previous order dated 25.11.2025 passed by this Court, considering the extreme gravity of the offences and taking note of the fact that the testimonies of the witnesses cannot be meticulously evaluated or subjected to a mini-trial while considering the bail applications;

(3 of 3)

[2026:RJ-JP:13863]

[CRLMB-3942/2026]

that there is no substantial material change in circumstances to warrant interference in these successive applications, and looking to the overall facts and circumstances of the case but without commenting on the merits/demerits of the case, this Court is not inclined to allow the second bail applications of the accusedapplicants.

¶33

Accordingly, the instant second bail applications filed under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 stand dismissed.

¶34

(SAMEER JAIN),J

¶35

JKP/s-167-168

Dharamraj @ Dharma S/O Om Prakash v. the State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dharamraj @ Dharma S/O Om Prakash v. the State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ajay Yadav S/O Shri Karmveer Yadav Vs Union of India

Amarsingh S/O Choturam Vs State of Rajasthan

Satish Yadav S/O Ramkuwar Vs State of Rajasthan

Smt. Khushboo W/O Sh. Surendra Vs State of Rajasthan

Pawan Baswal S/O Shri Devisahay Vs State of Rajasthan

Sangram Singh Urf Sonu S/O Raghuraj Singh Vs State of Rajasthan