Allowed¶20

Smt. Chandra Devi W/O Ramcharan v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC13 Feb 2026CRLMB/712/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Chandra Devi bail; S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 712/2026; CRLMB-712/2026; Rajasthan High Court Jaipur Bench; Justice Sandeep Taneja; order dated 13/02/2026; Section 483 B.N.S.S. bail; FIR No.117/2025 Police Station Babai District Jhunjhunu; Section 108 B.N.S.; initially Sections 80(2) and 85 B.N.S.; charge-sheet filed; custody since 21.11.2025; mother-in-law of deceased; post-mortem report showing no injury contended; personal bond Rs.50,000/-; two sureties Rs.25,000/- each; bail allowed without comment on merits.

What did the court decide?

Accused-petitioner Smt. Chandra Devi ordered to be released on bail under Section 483 B.N.S.S. on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each, subject to appearance before the Trial Court on all subsequent dates of hearing. ¶20

Smt. Chandra Devi W/O Ramcharan Vs State of Rajasthan — Bail and Remand | Rajasthan HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶20

Issue for consideration

Whether the accused-petitioner should be enlarged on bail under Section 483 B.N.S.S. in FIR No.117/2025 (Police Station Babai, District Jhunjhunu) for the offence punishable under Section 108 B.N.S., given that the charge-sheet has been filed and the trial is expected to take a long time.

¶17

Ratio / Principle

Taking into consideration the overall facts and circumstances, the arguments of both sides, the fact that the charge-sheet has already been filed and that the trial will take a long time to conclude, and without commenting on the merits or demerits of the case, the Court found it just and proper to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

¶19

Key takeaways

The accused-petitioner was ordered to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the Trial Court, with the stipulation that she appear before that Court on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon.ratio¶20

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

BAIL — S. 483 B.N.S.S. — granted. Accused-petitioner, mother-in-law of the deceased, arraigned under Section 108 B.N.S. in FIR No.117/2025, Police Station Babai, District Jhunjhunu; FIR earlier lodged under Sections 80(2) and 85 B.N.S. but charge-sheet filed only under Section 108 B.N.S. Charge-sheet already filed; petitioner in custody since 21.11.2025; no recovery required; trial expected to take considerable time. Held: without commenting on merits/demerits, enlargement on bail justified — personal bond Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each, with stipulation to appear before the Trial Court on all dates. (Rajasthan HC, Jaipur Bench, Sandeep Taneja, J.; order dated 13/02/2026.)

¶1

[2026:RJ-JP:6968]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 712/2026

¶4

Smt. Chandra Devi W/o Ramcharan, Aged About 45 Years, R/o Badokhari, Police Station Lahar, District Bhind (Madhyapradesh), Presently Ward No. 09, Mishro Ka Mohalla, Babai, Police Station Babai, District Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan. (At Present Confined In Sub Jail Khetri).

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vikram Beniwal For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vivek Sharma, PP Mr. Omveer Singh Saini

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP TANEJA Order

¶11

13/02/2026

¶12

This bail application has been filed by the accused-petitioner under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. in connection with FIR No.117/2025 registered at Police Station Babai, District Jhunjhunu, for the offence(s) punishable under Section(s) 108 B.N.S.

¶13

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the accusedpetitioner, who is the mother-in-law of the deceased, has been falsely implicated in this case and she has nothing to do with the alleged offences. Learned counsel further submits that though, the FIR was earlier lodged for the offences punishable under Sections 80(2) and 85 B.N.S., however, after investigation, none of the said offences has been found proved against the petitioner and charge-sheet has been filed under Section 108 B.N.S. Learned counsel also submits that as per the Post-Mortem Report, there is no injury on the body of the deceased. He further submits that there was no instigation on the part of the petitioner to the deceased to commit suicide, hence ingredients of Section 108 are not made out against the petitioner.

[2026:RJ-JP:6968]

[CRLMB-712/2026]

(2 of 2)

Learned counsel also contends that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent; she is in custody since 21.11.2025 and no recovery is required to be made from her. Learned counsel further submits that charge-sheet has already been filed in the matter and trial will considerably take long time in its conclusion, so no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner in custody, therefore, the benefit of bail under Section 483 B.N.S.S. may be granted to the accused-petitioner.

¶18

Per contra , learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the complainant oppose the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner hereinabove.

¶19

Taking into consideration the overall facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for both the parties, the fact that charge-sheet has already been filed and trial will take long time to conclude, thus, without commenting anything on the merits / demerits of the case, this Court deems it just and proper to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

¶20

Therefore, the bail application under Section 483 B.N.S.S. is allowed and the accused-petitioner, namely Smt. Chandra Devi W/o Ramcharan, is ordered to be released on bail, provided she furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the Trial Court, with the stipulation that the petitioner shall appear before that Court on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when she is called upon to do so.

¶21

(SANDEEP TANEJA),J

¶22

SAHIL SONI /21

Smt. Chandra Devi W/O Ramcharan v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Chandra Devi W/O Ramcharan 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

Rishikesh S/O Shri Pitam Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Tanuj Singh S/O Manveer Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Pansingh @ Pana S/O Jivan Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Ramlakshin S/O Shri Ramsingh Vs the State of Rajasthan

Shivdayal S/O Shri Girraj Prasad Vs State of Rajasthan

Shashi Gupta S/O Mohan Lal Gupta Vs State of Rajasthan