Allowed¶25

Rohitash S/O Indraj v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC7 Jan 2026CRLMB/8112/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Rajasthan HC Jaipur, S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 8112/2025 (CRLMB-8112/2025), decided 07/01/2026 by Justice Pramil Kumar Mathur — bail under Section 483 BNSS granted to Ajeet @ Kalu in FIR No.238/2024, PS Patan (Sikar), District Neem Ka Thana, for BNS offences ss.115(2), 109(1), 326(g), 324(5), 351(2), 331(5), 3(5) — personal bond Rs.50,000, two sureties Rs.25,000 each, fortnightly appearance before SHO for six months, cancellation clause on breach or similar offence; co-petitioner Rohitash's bail already allowed 28.07.2025.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted to petitioner no.2 Ajeet @ Kalu on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court, subject to conditions including fortnightly presence before SHO-Patan (Sikar) for six months.

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

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶25

Issue for consideration

Whether petitioner no.2 Ajeet @ Kalu should be granted bail under Section 483 of BNSS in FIR No.238/2024, Police Station Patan (Sikar), District Neem Ka Thana.

¶14

Court's answer

On consideration of rival submissions and the material on record, and without expressing any opinion on the merits/demerits of the case, the Court was inclined to grant the benefit of bail to petitioner no.2 Ajeet @ Kalu.

¶24

Ratio / Principle

The bail application under Section 483 B.N.S.S. was allowed; petitioner Ajeet @ Kalu is 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 learned trial court for his appearance on all dates till conclusion of the trial.

¶25

Key takeaways

Petitioner directed to mark his presence fortnightly every month for six months before SHO-Patan (Sikar), District Neem Ka Thana; the concerned SHO is to maintain a register for this purpose and immediately report any failure to mark presence to the concerned Court.ratio¶29
Breach of any of the directions, or the petitioner being found involved in a similar nature of offence, shall alone be a reason for the trial Court to cancel the bail granted by this Court.ratio¶31

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail under S. 483 BNSS — FIR No.238/2024, P.S. Patan (Sikar), Dist. Neem Ka Thana — offences under ss. 115(2), 109(1), 326(g), 324(5), 351(2), 331(5) and 3(5) BNS — bail of petitioner no.1 Rohitash already allowed on 28.07.2025; order disposes of application of petitioner no.2 Ajeet @ Kalu — counsel submitted 19 criminal cases pending against petitioner (acquitted in two, bailed out in rest), co-accused Rohitash and Ramsingh already enlarged on bail on 28.07.2025, no injury caused, no weapon recovered from conscious possession, petitioner in custody since 28.02.2025 and charge-sheet filed — bail granted without expressing any opinion on merits, on personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each — conditions: fortnightly presence before SHO-Patan for six months with register to be maintained; breach of directions or involvement in similar offence to be reason for trial Court to cancel bail.

¶1

[2026:RJ-JP:411]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 8112/2025

¶4

Rohitash S/o Indraj, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Lujota, Police Station Nangal Choudhary, District Mahendragarh, Hariyana ( Presently Accused Petitioner Is In District Jail At Sikar (Raj.)

¶5

Ajeet @ Kalu S/o Ramfal, Aged About 26 Years, R/o Bhedanti, Police Station Nangal Choudhary, District Mahendragarh, Hariyana ( Presently Accused Petitioner Is In District Jail At Sikar (Raj.)

¶6

----Petitioners

¶7

Versus

¶8

State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p.

¶9

----Respondent

¶10

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. Manish Gupta
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Manvendra Singh Shekhawat,PP

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAMIL KUMAR MATHUR

¶12

Order

¶13

07/01/2026

¶14

The petitioner has preferred this bail application under Section 483 of BNSS in FIR No.238/2024 registered at Police Station Patan (Sikar), District-Neem Ka Thana for offences under Sections 115(2), 109(1), 326(g), 324(5), 351(2), 331(5) and 3(5) of BNS.

¶15

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Public Prosecutor and perused the material available on record.

¶16

The bail application of petitioner no.1-Rohitash has already been allowed by this Court on 28.07.2025. Therefore, by this order bail application of petitioner no.2 is being disposed of.

¶17

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner

¶18

has falsely been implicated in this case. According to the criminal

[2026:RJ-JP:411]

[CRLMB-8112/2025]

(2 of 3)

record 19 criminal cases are pending against the presentpetitioner-Ajeet @ Kalu out of which in two cases, he has been acquitted and in rest of the cases he has been bailed out. Coaccused-Rohitash and Ramsingh have been enlarged on bail by this Court on 28.07.2025. No injury has been caused to any person. He further submits that none of weapon has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. The allegation comes out from the contents of the FIR is to cause fire in the cabin of the complainant. He further submits that the petitioner is behind the Bars since 28.02.2025 and charge-sheet has been filed. The trial of the case may take considerable time, therefore, no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner in further custody, hence the bail application of the petitioner may be allowed.

¶23

Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application.

¶24

On consideration of the rival submission and material available on record and deliberating all the facts and circumstances of the case, and without expressing any opinion on the merits/demerits of the case, I am inclined to grant benefit of bail to the petitioner.

¶25

Accordingly, the bail application under Section 483 B.N.S.S. is allowed and it is ordered that the petitioner- Ajeet @ Kalu S/o Ramfal shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court for his appearance before that Court on all the dates till conclusion of the trial.

[2026:RJ-JP:411]

[CRLMB-8112/2025]

(3 of 3)

Further, petitioner is directed to mark his presence fortnightly in every month for a period of six months before the SHO-Patan (Sikar), District Neem Ka Thana.

¶30

Concerned SHO is directed to maintain a register for this purpose. In case the petitioner fails to mark his presence in the concerned Police Station as directed above, the concerned SHO is directed to immediately report the matter to the concerned Court in this regard.

¶31

If breach of any of the directions is reported or come to the notice of the Court and petitioner is found involved in similar nature of offence, the same shall alone be a reason for the trial Court to cancel the bail granted to the petitioner by this Court.

¶32

(PRAMIL KUMAR MATHUR),J

¶33

Arun/1

Rohitash S/O Indraj v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rohitash S/O Indraj 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

Pawan Kumar @ Chintu S/O Ramchandra Vs State of Rajasthan

Devendra @ Devu S/O Shri Aidalsingh @ Sadhu Vs State of Rajasthan

Vishal Singh S/O Balveer Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Deepak Kumar Pradhan @ Dulu S/O Shri Madhav Pradhan Vs State of Rajasthan

Imran Khan S/O Aziz Khan Vs State of Rajasthan

Aasmohammed S/O Sher Mohammed @ Sheru Vs State of Rajasthan