Irfan S/O Sh. Mohmmad Haneef Vs State of Rajasthan

¶1

[2026:RJ-JP:25042]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 8011/2026

¶4

URN: CRLMB / 14656U / 2026

¶5

Irfan S/o Sh. Mohmmad Haneef, Aged About 26 Years, R/o Kahro Ka Mohlla, Kansua, Near Shiv Mandir, P.S. Udyog Nagar, District Kota (Raj.) (At Present In J.C. At District Jail Sawaimadopur).

¶6

----Accused-Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P.

¶9

----Respondent

¶10

Connected With

¶11

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 10008/2026

¶12

URN: CRLMB / 18584U / 2026

¶13

Arun Kumar S/o Prahlad, R/o Patel Nagar Alanpur Link Road Near Tooj Hotel Sawai Madhopur. (Petitioner Is In District Jail Sawai Madhopur).

¶14

----Accused-Petitioner

¶15

Versus

¶16

State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P.

¶17

----Respondent

¶18

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 10009/2026

¶19

URN: CRLMB / 18589U / 2026

¶20

Jitendra Kumar S/o Dharmraj, R/o Faloodi Kanwari Prem Nagar Football Maidan Ke Pass Todara, Police Station Rawanjna Dunger District Sawai Madhopur. (Petitioner Is In District Jail Sawai Madhopur).

¶21

----Accused-Petitioner

¶22

Versus

¶23

State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P.

¶24

----Respondent

¶25

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. Majhar Hussain for Ms. Shahin Bano Mr. Wasim Akram
	Ms. Soniya Saini
	Mr. Rajendra Prasad Jogi Mr. Aryan Verma
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Manvendra Singh Choudhary, PP

(2 of 4)

[2026:RJ-JP:25042]

[CRLMB-8011/2026]

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SANGEETA SHARMA

¶30

Order

¶31

06/07/2026

¶32

These instant bail applications have been filed on behalf of the accused-petitioners under Section 483 of BNSS in connection with FIR No.04/2025 registered at Police Station Cyber Police Station (Sawai Madhopur), District Sawai Madhopur for the offence(s) punishable under Sections 318(4), 319(2), 61(2)(a) of BNS & under Section 66D of IT Act.

¶33

Learned counsel for the accused-petitioners submit that the accused-petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case. They also submit that the accused-petitioners are in custody since long. They further submit that one criminal antecedent registered against the accused-petitioner Irfan under Section 13 RPGO Act, has already been decided earlier; 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.

¶34

Per contra , learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the contentions put forth by the learned counsel for the accused-petitioners but did not dispute the fact that there are no criminal antecedents of similar nature against the accusedpetitioners.

¶35

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and rival contentions advanced by the learned counsel for both the parties; and the material available on record in the form of charge-sheet; particularly keeping in view the fact that charge-sheet has been

[2026:RJ-JP:25042]

[CRLMB-8011/2026]

(3 of 4)

filed; that accused-petitioners are behind the bars since 08.04.2026; that there are no criminal antecedents of similar nature against the accused-petitioners; that 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.

¶40

Therefore, these instant bail applications under Section 483 BNSS are accordingly, allowed and the accused-petitioners Irfan S/o Sh. Mohmmad Haneef, Arun Kumar S/o Prahlad and Jitendra Kumar S/o Dharmraj 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.

¶41

It is made clear that the accused-petitioners shall not involve themselves in any offence(s) during currency of the bail. 7. In case of any breach of the aforementioned condition, the learned Public Prosecutor shall be free to move the application against the accused-petitioners for cancellation of the bail before the concerned Court.

¶42

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.

¶43

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

[2026:RJ-JP:25042]

[CRLMB-8011/2026]

(4 of 4)

(SANGEETA SHARMA),J

¶48

34-36/SHIVANI

Irfan S/O Sh. Mohmmad Haneef v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Irfan S/O Sh. Mohmmad Haneef 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

Salman Khan S/O Taiyab Khan Vs State of Rajasthan

Ranjeet S/O Maherchand Vs the State of Rajasthan

Teekam Singh Prajapat S/O Sh. Suwalal Prajapat Vs the State of Rajasthan

Saddam Khan S/O Fumman Khan Vs the State of Rajasthan

Manish S/O Ramdhan Vs State of Rajasthan

Sayyum Khan Son of Shri Israil Khan Vs State of Rajasthan