Teekam Saras @ Golu S/O Jagdish Vs State of Rajasthan

[2026:RJ-JP:15519]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 5005/2026

Teekam Saras @ Golu S/o Jagdish, Aged About 19 Years, R/o Church Road, Harijan Basti, Police Station Beawar City, District Beawar (Raj.) (At Present Confined At District Jail Beawar).

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Shashank Shekhar Pachauri For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vivek Sharma, PP

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAMIL KUMAR MATHUR Order

¶11

15/04/2026

¶12

The petitioner has preferred this bail application under Section 483 of BNSS in FIR No.63/2026 registered at Police Station Saket Nagar, District Beawar for offences under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 324(4), 189(2) and 109(1) of BNS, 2023.

¶13

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Public Prosecutor and perused the material available on record.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that the name of the petitioner does not find mention in the FIR and that none of the injuries attributed to the incident are dangerous to life in nature. It is contended that, as per the medical report, no injuries have been opined to be life-threatening. The petitioner has been in custody since 03.02.2026. Though two criminal antecedents have been reported against the petitioner but it is

[2026:RJ-JP:15519]

[CRLMB-5005/2026]

(2 of 2)

submitted that in both cases he has been granted bail. The trial of the case will take considerable time, therefore, no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner in further custody, consequently, the bail application deserves to be allowed.

¶19

Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application.

¶20

On consideration of the rival submissions and material available on record and in light of submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner but without expressing any opinion on merits/demerits of the case, I am inclined to grant benefit of bail to the petitioner.

¶21

Consequently, the bail application under Section 483 B.N.S.S. is allowed and it is directed that the petitioner Teekam Saras @ Golu S/o Jagdish , 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 court with the stipulation that he shall appear before that Court on all subsequent dates of hearing till conclusion of the trial.

¶22

(PRAMIL KUMAR MATHUR),J

¶23

Arun/33

Teekam Saras @ Golu S/O Jagdish v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Teekam Saras @ Golu S/O Jagdish 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

Hansraj S/O Haribhajan Vs State of Rajasthan

Vimal Alias Vishal S/O Babulal Vs State of Rajasthan

Dinesh S/O Kajodmal Vs State of Rajasthan

Tasveera Urf Kashmeera Vs State of Rajasthan

Dashrath S/O Mohar Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Hariom S/O Narendra Kumar Sharma Vs the State of Rajasthan