Ghanshyam vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:31134) on 16 July, 2025

Rajasthan High Court – Jodhpur

Ghanshyam vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:31134) on 16 July, 2025

[2025:RJ-JD:31134]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
    S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 5163/2025

Amit S/o Rajendra Kumar @ Raju, Aged About 22 Years,
Resident of 14 SPM Godhuwali Dhani, Police Station Lalgarh
Jatan, District Sri Ganganagar, Raj.
(At Present Lodged In Distt. Jail, Hanumangarh)
                                                                   ----Petitioner
                                    Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor
                                                                 ----Respondent
                              Connected With
    S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 4498/2025
Ghanshyam S/o Shri Jaimal Ram, Aged About 24 Years, Resident
Of 14 S.P.M. Godhuwali Dhani, Police Station Lalgarh Jatan,
District Sri Ganganagar, Raj.
(At Present Lodged In District Jail, Hanumangarh)
                                                                   ----Petitioner
                                    Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor
                                                                 ----Respondent


For Petitioner(s)         :     Mr. Rakesh Matoria
                                Mr. Kuldeep Sharma
For Respondent(s)         :     Mr. Hanuman Prajapati, PP
                                Mr. Ravindra Pal Singh



          HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUKESH RAJPUROHIT

Order

16/07/2025
These applications for bail under Section 483 of BNSS (439

Cr.P.C.) have been filed by the petitioners who have been arrested

in connection with F.I.R. No.775/2024 registered at Police Station

Hanumangarh Junction, District Hanumangarh, for offences under

(Downloaded on 16/07/2025 at 08:10:37 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:31134] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-5163/2025]

Sections 109(1), 331(6), 331(7), 115(2), 127(2), 191(2), 191(3)

and 190 of the BNS.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Public

Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the

petitioners have been falsely implicated in the present case.

Learned counsel further submits that the petitioners were not

named in the FIR and they have not attributed any specific injury

to the complainant. Learned counsel submits that the name of the

petitioners were taken for first time in supplementary statements

of the injured after improving over the original version of events,

recorded on 25.03.2025 almost after 5 months. Learned counsel

further submitted that the injured and his wife were having a

dispute which led to this incident. In the injury report, it was

observed that there was no bone injury seen. Learned counsel

further submitted that the petitioners were not involved in the

alleged incident and have been roped at a later stage. Learned

counsel submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody since

26.03.2025 and the trial of the case will take sufficiently long

time, therefore, the benefit of bail may be granted to the accused-

petitioner.

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor as well as learned

counsel for the complainant have vehemently opposed the bail

applications. However, the learned counsel for the complainant

submits that the complainant is injured and brutally beaten by the

group, however, admitted that no specific allegation is made

(Downloaded on 16/07/2025 at 08:10:37 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:31134] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-5163/2025]

against the present petitioner nor they have been named in the

FIR.

Having considered the rival submissions, facts and

circumstances of the case, considering that the petitioners are in

judicial custody since 26.03.2025, and the trial of the case will

take sufficiently long time, without expressing any opinion on

merits/demerits of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the

petitioners on bail.

Consequently, these bail applications under Section 483 of

BNSS (439 Cr.P.C.) are allowed. It is ordered that the accused-

petitioners (1) Amit S/o Rajendra Kumar @ Raju and (2)

Ghanshyam S/o Shri Jaimal Ram, arrested in connection with

F.I.R. No.775/2024 registered at Police Station Hanumangarh

Junction, District Hanumangarh, shall be released on bail, not

wanted in any other case, provided they furnishes a personal bond

of Rs.50,000/- and two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each, to the

satisfaction of learned trial court, for their appearance before that

court on each & every date of hearing and whenever called upon

to do so till completion of the trial.

(MUKESH RAJPUROHIT),J
81-82-Hanuman/-

(Downloaded on 16/07/2025 at 08:10:37 PM)

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)