Allowed

Aarif S/O Hameed v. the State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC13 Jul 2026CRLMB/7383/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed joint bail applications filed by two accused petitioners under Section 483 of BNSS. The court held that since the charge-sheet was already filed and trial would take its own time, keeping the accused in custody was not fruitful without expressing an opinion on the merits.

What did the court decide?

The accused petitioners were ordered to be released on bail by furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 1,00,000/- with two sureties of Rs. 50,000/- each.

Aarif S/O Hameed Vs the State of Rajasthan — Bail and Remand | Rajasthan HC (2026)

¶1

[2026:RJ-JP:26156]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 6176/2026 URN: CRLMB / 11032U / 2026

¶4

Shaukeen Alias Shaukat S/o Husaina, Aged 38 Years, R/o Odra, Police Station Kishangarhbas, District Khairthal-Tijara. At Present In Sub Jail, Kishangarhbas.

¶5

----Accused-Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State of Rajasthan, Through the PP

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

Connected With

¶10

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 7383/2026 URN: CRLMB / 13445U / 2026

¶11

Aarif S/o Hameed, Age 32 Years, R/o Odra, Police Station Kishangarh-Bass, District Khairthal-Tijara. (At Present In Sub Jail, Kishangarh-Bass).

¶12

----Accused-Petitioner

¶13

Versus

¶14

The State of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor

¶15

----Respondent

¶16

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Harendra Singh Mr. Gajender Singh Rathore For Respondent(s) : Mr. Manvendra Singh Choudhary, PP

¶17

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SANGEETA SHARMA

¶18

Order

¶19

13/07/2026

¶20

These instant bail applications have been filed against the orders of the Trial Court dated 16.04.2026 and 27.04.2026 on behalf of the accused-petitioners under Section 483 of BNSS in connection with FIR No. 121/2026 registered at Police Station Kishangarh Bas, District Khairthal-Tijara for the offence(s)

[2026:RJ-JP:26156]

[CRLMB-6176/2026]

(2 of 3)

punishable under Sections 319(2), 318(4), 336(3), 338, 340(2), 61(2) of BNS and under Section 66D of IT Act.

¶25

Learned counsel for the accused-petitioners submits that the accused-petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case; that charge-sheet has already been filed; that the accused-petitioners are in custody since long; that the alleged offences are triable by Magistrate; that there are no criminal antecedents registered against the accused-petitioner Aarif; conclusion of trial will take its own time, so no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the accused-petitioners behind the bars and, therefore, prays that the accused-petitioners may be granted the benefit of bail under Section 483 of BNSS.

¶26

Per contra , learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposes the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the accusedpetitioners hereinabove. It is further submitted that there is one criminal antecedent registered against the accused-petitioner Shaukeen Alias Shaukat under Sections 189(2), 115(2), 126(2), 117(2), 118(1) and 324(4) of BNS so, they should not be enlarged on bail.

¶27

Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and material available on record. Keeping in view the fact that the accused-petitioners are in custody since 09.04.2026; that the charge-sheet against the accused-petitioners has already been filed; that there are no criminal antecedents registered against the accused-petitioner Aarif; 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.

[2026:RJ-JP:26156]

[CRLMB-6176/2026]

(3 of 3)

Therefore, these instant bail applications under Section 483 BNSS are accordingly, allowed and the accused-petitioners namely Shaukeen Alias Shaukat S/o Husaina and Aarif S/o Hameed 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.

¶32

It is made clear that the accused-petitioners shall not involve themselves in any offence(s) during currency of the bail.

¶33

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.

¶34

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

¶35

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

¶36

(SANGEETA SHARMA),J

¶37

13-14/KAVISH

Aarif S/O Hameed v. the State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aarif S/O Hameed v. the State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mukesh S/O Rameshwar Vs the State of Rajasthan

Haseen S/O Jakar Vs State of Rajasthan

Dilawar @ Dilla S/O Khussi Vs State of Rajasthan

Shaukeen Alias Shaukat S/O Husaina Vs State of Rajasthan

Vinod Kumar S/O Late Shri Devilal Vs State of Rajasthan

Ramakant S/O Shri Girraj Prasad Sharma Vs State of Rajasthan