Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

Mahaveer S/O Hemraj Vs State of Rajasthan — Bail and Remand | Rajasthan HC (2026)

Home
Rajasthan HC
2026
Mahaveer S/O Hemraj Vs State of RajasthanMahaveer S/O Hemraj v. State of Rajasthan

Dismissed¶¶21

Mahaveer S/O Hemraj v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC17 Apr 2026CRLMB/713/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Rajasthan High Court (Jaipur Bench), single bench of Ganesh Ram Meena, J., order dated 17/04/2026 in S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 713/2026 ([CRLMB-713/2026]) — bail application of accused Mahaveer under Section 483 BNSS DISMISSED in FIR No. 250/2024, P.S. Kishanganj, District Baran, for offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 103(1), 109(1), 118(1), 3(5) BNS and 4/25 Arms Act. Court relied on specific FIR allegations of sword attack on deceased Lalit and injury to witness Narendar, sharp-weapon injuries shown in post-mortem and injury reports, and statements of examined witnesses PW10-Murti Bai and PW12-Pooja indicating petitioner's active involvement; counsel had urged absence of specific allegation by injured witness, simple nature of injuries, and attribution of the fatal (printed 'fetal') injury to co-accused Hem Raj; custody since 21.12.2024 noted. Keywords: bail refused, Section 483 BNSS, BNS 103(1), sword/sharp-edged weapon, trial-stage witnesses examined, no cases cited.

What did the court decide?

Taking into consideration the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the specific allegations against the accused-petitioner (attack on deceased Lalit and causing injury to injured witness Narendar, as per the FIR and injury/post-mortem reports showing sharp weapon injuries) and his active involvement in committing the offence borne out by the statements of PW10-Murti Bai and PW12-Pooja, the Court declined to enlarge the accused-petitioner on bail. ¶¶20

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

Issue for consideration

Whether the accused-petitioner Mahaveer should be enlarged on bail under Section 483 BNSS in connection with FIR No. 250/2024, Police Station Kishanganj, District Baran (offences under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 103(1), 109(1), 118(1), 3(5) of BNS and 4/25 of Arms Act), at the stage where the injured witness and other material witnesses stand examined.

Court's answer

Taking into consideration the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the specific allegations against the accused-petitioner (attack on deceased Lalit and causing injury to injured witness Narendar, as per the FIR and injury/post-mortem reports showing sharp weapon injuries) and his active involvement in committing the offence borne out by the statements of PW10-Murti Bai and PW12-Pooja, the Court declined to enlarge the accused-petitioner on bail.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail under Section 483 BNSS refused; application dismissed — FIR No. 250/2024, P.S. Kishanganj, District Baran — offences under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 103(1), 109(1), 118(1), 3(5) BNS and 4/25 Arms Act — specific allegations against petitioner Mahaveer of attacking deceased Lalit and injuring injured-witness Narendar with a sword (sharp-edged weapon); post-mortem report of the deceased and injury report of the injured show sharp weapon injuries — injured witness Narendar, PW10-Murti Bai and PW12-Pooja already examined at trial; PW10 and PW12 specifically stated active involvement of the petitioner in the offence resulting in the death of Lalit (counsel contended no specific allegation by the injured witness of sharp-weapon injury, injuries simple, and the fatal injury — printed 'fetal' — attributed to Hem Raj; petitioner in custody since 21.12.2024) — considering overall facts, allegations and active involvement, Court not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

A

[2026:RJ-JP:16116]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 713/2026

Mahaveer S/o Hemraj, Aged About 24 Years, R/o Brajnagar, Police Station Kishanganj, District Baran. (At Present Petitioner Is Confined In District Jail, Baran).

----Petitioner

Versus

State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kalyan Chand Surela For Respondent(s) : Ms. Aarti Sharma, PP

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA Order

17/04/2026

This bail application has been filed by the accused petitioner under Section 483 BNSS in connection with FIR No. 250/2024 registered at Police Station Kishanganj, District Baran for offence under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 103(1), 109(1), 118(1), 3(5) of BNS and 4/25 of Arms Act.

Heard and considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Public Prosecutor. 3. Learned counsel for the accused petitioner submits that the injured witness, Narendar, has already been examined by the trial Court and in his statement, he has not made any specific allegation against the petitioner of causing sharp weapon injury. Narendar. He further submits that all the injuries sustained by the injured Narendar is found to be simple in nature. Counsel also submits that the other material witnesses, PW10-Murti Bai, and PW12-Pooja have also been examined and in their statements

[2026:RJ-JP:16116]

[CRLMB-713/2026]

(2 of 2)

also, there is no allegation against the accused-petitioner of causing any injury with the sword. He further submits that the fetal injury has been attributed to Hem Raj. Counsel also submits that the accused-petitioner is in custody since 21.12.2024.

Learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the bail application and submits that there are specific allegations against the accused-petitioner of inflicting injuries with the sword to the injured, which is a sharp edged weapon. 5. On perusal of the post-mortem report of the deceased Lalit and so also injury report of injured Narendar, they said to have sustained the sharp weapon injuries. 6. On perusal of the first information report, there are specific allegations against the accused petitioner-Mahaveer, in making attack on the deceased-Lalit, and causing injury to the injured witness Narendar.

In the statement of PW 10-Murti Bai, it has been specifically stated that deceased Lalit was attacked by Mahaveer, Sonu, Hem Raj, Bhooli Bai and present petition-Mahaveer. The witness PoojaPW12 has also specifically stated about the active involvement of the accused-petitioner in committing the offence, which resulted into death of the deceased, Lalit.

Taking into consideration the overall facts and circumstances of the case and so also allegations against the accused-petitioner and his active involvement, in committing the offence, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the accused petitioner on bail.

Hence, this bail application is dismissed.

(GANESH RAM MEENA),J

NEERU/13

Issues for consideration

1 issue framed by the court

AI extract

1.
Whether the accused-petitioner Mahaveer should be enlarged on bail under Section 483 BNSS in connection with FIR No. 250/2024, Police Station Kishanganj, District Baran (offences under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 103(1), 109(1), 118(1), 3(5) of BNS and 4/25 of Arms Act), at the stage where the injured witness and other material witnesses stand examined.¶¶12
The court held
Taking into consideration the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the specific allegations against the accused-petitioner (attack on deceased Lalit and causing injury to injured witness Narendar, as per the FIR and injury/post-mortem reports showing sharp weapon injuries) and his active involvement in committing the offence borne out by the statements of PW10-Murti Bai and PW12-Pooja, the Court declined to enlarge the accused-petitioner on bail.ratio¶¶20

Statutes considered

3 provisions across 3 enactments

AI extract

BNSS483¶¶12
BNS115(2), 126(2), 103(1), 109(1), 118(1), 3(5)¶¶12
Arms Act4/25¶¶12

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Prior proceeding
FIR No. 250/2024 registered at Police Station Kishanganj, District Baran, for offence under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 103(1), 109(1), 118(1), 3(5) of BNS and 4/25 of Arms Act.¶¶12
Prior proceeding
Trial in progress: injured witness Narendar already examined by the trial Court; counsel submits his statement contains no specific allegation against the petitioner of causing sharp weapon injury.¶¶13
Prior proceeding
Statements of PW10-Murti Bai and PW12-Pooja recorded; as read by the Court, these witnesses specifically stated the active involvement of the accused-petitioner in committing the offence causing the death of Lalit (per counsel, no allegation against petitioner of causing injury with the sword).¶¶19
Prior proceeding
Accused-petitioner in custody since 21.12.2024.¶¶17

Parties & counsel

AI extract

petitioner
Mahaveer S/o Hemraj¶¶4
Kalyan Chand Surela
respondent
State Of Rajasthan¶¶7
Aarti Sharma

Coram

AI extract

Ganesh Ram Meenaauthor¶¶10

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Rajasthan HC
Decided on: 17 Apr 2026 · April
Registered: 12 Jan 2026
Case no.: CRLMB/713/2026
CNR: RJHC020030752026
Topic: Bail and Remand
Bench: Ganesh Ram Meena
Disposal: DISMISSED
Case type: S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from Ganesh Ram Meena

Purushottam S/O Ramnath Adopted S/O Jagannath Vs State of Rajasthan
16 Apr 2026
Sunil Kumar S/O Yadaram Vs State of Rajasthan
16 Apr 2026
Bajrang Singh S/O Mangilal Vs State of Rajasthan
16 Apr 2026
Pintu Kumar Tanwar S/O Panchulal Vs State of Rajasthan
17 Apr 2026
Sushil Karnani S/O Shri Chhagan Lal Vs the State of Rajasthan
17 Apr 2026
Babulal S/O Laturlal Vs State of Rajasthan
17 Apr 2026

Cite this judgement

Mahaveer S/O Hemraj v. State of Rajasthan, CRLMB/713/2026 (RJ), decided on 17 April 2026.

The High Court of Rajasthan publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Statutes3

BNSS483
BNS115(2), 126(2), 103(1), 109(1), 118(1), 3(5)
Arms Act4/25

View all statutes

Procedural history4

FIR No. 250/2024 registered at Police Station Kishanganj, District Baran, for offence under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 103(1), 109(1), 118(1), 3(5) of BNS and 4/25 of Arms Act.
Trial in progress: injured witness Narendar already examined by the trial Court; counsel submits his statement contains no specific allegation against the petitioner of causing sharp weapon injury.

View full history

Bench / Coram

Ganesh Ram Meena

Parties & counsel