Rajveer S/O Raghuveer Nath v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC6 May 2026CRLMB/5524/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Rajveer and Deewan alias Sunil bail granted; Rajasthan High Court Jaipur; S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 5524/2026; Sangeeta Sharma, J.; 06/05/2026; FIR 315/2025 PS Singhana Jhunjhunu; Section 303(2) BNS 2023; Section 483 BNSS; custody since 10.03.2026; charge-sheet filed; offence triable by Magistrate; personal bond Rs. 1,00,000/- plus two sureties of Rs. 50,000/- each; bail allowed.

What did the court decide?

Both accused-petitioners (Rajveer and Deewan alias Sunil) ordered to be released on bail, each furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 1,00,000/- with two sureties of Rs. 50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the Trial Court, with condition to appear before the Trial Court (and any Court to which the matter is transferred) on all subsequent dates of hearing. ¶¶22

Rajveer S/O Raghuveer Nath Vs State of Rajasthan — Bail and Remand | Rajasthan HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶22

Issue for consideration

Whether the accused-petitioners, in custody since 10.03.2026 in connection with FIR No. 315/2025 (offence punishable under Section 303(2) of B.N.S., 2023), should be enlarged on bail under Section 483 of BNSS.

¶¶19

Court's answer

Considering that the charge-sheet has been filed, the accused-petitioners are in custody since 10.03.2026, the offence is triable by Magistrate and trial will take its own time, the Court, without expressing any opinion on merits/demerits, deems it just and proper to enlarge the accused-petitioners on bail.

¶¶21

Ratio / Principle

The bail application under Section 483 BNSS is allowed; each accused-petitioner (Rajveer and Deewan alias Sunil) is to be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 1,00,000/- with two sureties of Rs. 50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the Trial Court, with stipulation to appear before that Court (or any transferee Court) on all subsequent dates of hearing.

¶¶22

Key takeaways

The observations made in the order are only for the decision of the instant bail application and shall not impact the trial of the case in any manner; breach of bail conditions entitles the Public Prosecutor to seek cancellation before the concerned Court.obiter¶¶27

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail — S. 483 BNSS application allowed by Rajasthan High Court (Jaipur Bench), Sangeeta Sharma, J. (order dated 06/05/2026) for two accused in FIR No. 315/2025, P.S. Singhana, District Jhunjhunu, for offence punishable under S. 303(2) of B.N.S., 2023. Grounds: charge-sheet already filed; accused in custody since 10.03.2026; offence triable by Magistrate; trial will take its own time. Each accused to furnish personal bond of Rs. 1,00,000/- with two sureties of Rs. 50,000/- each; observations confined to the bail decision and without prejudice to trial; Public Prosecutor free to move for cancellation on breach of conditions.

¶1

[2026:RJ-JP:19118]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 5524/2026

¶4

Rajveer S/o Raghuveer Nath, Age About 33 Years, R/o Kanhora Police Station Rodai District Rewadi Haryana. (At Present Confined In Jail Khetri District Jhunjhunu).

¶5

Deewan Alias Sunil S/o Rajunath, Age About 25 Years, R/o Ward No. 17, Dinod Police Station Sadar Bhiwani Haryana. (At Present Confined In Jail Khetri District Jhunjhunu).

¶6

----Accused-Petitioners

¶7

Versus

¶8

State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor

¶9

----Respondent

¶10

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. Dushyant Singh Naruka
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Manvendra Singh Choudhary, PP

¶11

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SANGEETA SHARMA

¶12

Order

¶13

06/05/2026

¶14

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the accused-petitioners under Section 483 of BNSS in connection with FIR No. 315/2025 registered at Police Station Singhana, District Jhunjhunu for the offence(s) punishable under Section 303(2) of B.N.S., 2023.

¶15

Learned counsel for the accused-petitioners submits that the accused-petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case; charge-sheet has already been filed. He also submits that the accused-petitioner are in custody since 10.03.2026. He further submits that the alleged offence is triable by Magistrate; conclusion of trial will take its own time, so no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the accused-petitioners behind the

[2026:RJ-JP:19118]

[CRLMB-5524/2026]

(2 of 3)

bars and, therefore, prays that the accused-petitioners may be granted the benefit of bail under Section 483 of BNSS.

¶20

Per contra , learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the accusedpetitioners hereinabove and submits that there are criminal antecedents registered against the accused-petitioners.

¶21

Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for both the parties; that charge-sheet has already been filed; that the accused-petitioners are in custody since 10.03.2026; that the present offence is triable by Magistrate; trial will take its own time. Hence, this Court without expressing any opinion on the merits/demerits of the case, deems it just and proper to enlarge the accused-petitioners on bail.

¶22

Therefore, the instant bail application under Section 483 BNSS is accordingly, allowed and the accused-petitioners Rajveer S/o Raghuveer Nath & Deewan Alias Sunil S/o Rajunath are ordered to be released on bail, provided each of them furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- with two sureties of Rs. 50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the Trial Court, with the stipulation that they 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.

¶23

In case of any breach of the aforementioned conditions, the learned Public Prosecutor shall be free to move the application against the accused-petitioners for cancellation of the bail before the concerned Court.

[2026:RJ-JP:19118]

[CRLMB-5524/2026]

(3 of 3)

The observation made hereinabove is only for decision of the instant bail application and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner.

¶28

Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the concerned trial Court through e-mail/fax, for necessary compliance.

¶29

(SANGEETA SHARMA),J

¶30

PUNEET KUMAR/27

Rajveer S/O Raghuveer Nath v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajveer S/O Raghuveer Nath 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

Manish Kumar S/O Pradeep Kumar Vs State of Rajasthan

Surendra Kumar S/O Hariram Vs State of Rajasthan

Ranjeet @ Mukesh S/O Hariram Vs State of Rajasthan

Navet Koli S/O Frances Koli Vs State of Rajasthan

Sayar Singh S/O Sarjeet Singh Vs the State of Rajasthan

Bhagwan Singh S/O Shri Motilal Bheel Vs State of Rajasthan