Natha vs State Of Rajasthan (2026:Rj-Jd:17077)
2026 Latest Caselaw 5698 Raj

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Natha vs State Of Rajasthan (2026:Rj-Jd:17077) on 13 April, 2026

Author: Yogendra Kumar Purohit

Bench: Yogendra Kumar Purohit

[2026:RJ-JD:17077]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
     S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 4377/2026

Natha S/o Arjun, Aged About 19 Years, Resident Of Khadrafali
Talvaraka Police Station Aburoad Sadar District Sirohi Rajasthan.
(At Present In Judicial Custody At Aburoad Jail)
                                                                       ----Petitioner
                                         Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
                                                                     ----Respondent


For Petitioner(s)              :    Mr. Arpit Surana
For Respondent(s)              :    Mr. Prem Singh Panwar,PP



     HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YOGENDRA KUMAR PUROHIT

Order

13/04/2026

1. The instant bail application has been filed by the applicant

Natha S/o Arjun under Section 483 BNSS against the order

impugned passed by learned court below in connection with FIR

No.1/2026 registered at Police Station Aburoad Sadar

District Sirohi for the offence(s) under Sections 115(2),

126(2) & 110 of BNS and Section 4/25 of Arms Act.

2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned public

prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the

applicant has been falsely implicated in the case. The applicant is

in judicial custody and trial of the case will take long time to

conclude. Accordingly learned counsel submits that the accused-

applicant may be enlarged on bail.

4. Per contra, learned public prosecutor opposed the bail

application.

(Uploaded on 13/04/2026 at 01:23:58 PM)

[2026:RJ-JD:17077] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-4377/2026]

5. I have considered the rival submissions advanced by the

learned counsel for the parties, and perused the medical report

which states that two injuries No.1 & 2 sustained by the injured

are caused by sharp weapon and injury No.2 is opined to be

dangerous to life.

6. Looking to the nature and gravity of the offences, keeping in

view overall facts and circumstances of the case, without

commenting on the merits and demerits of the case, this Court is

not inclined to grant bail to the accused-applicant at this stage.

7. Accordingly, the bail application is dismissed. The applicant is

at liberty to move fresh bail application after statements of injured

and eye witness-Mukesh are recorded before the Court below.

(YOGENDRA KUMAR PUROHIT),J 27-Arti/-

(Uploaded on 13/04/2026 at 01:23:58 PM)

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)