[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Sandeep vs State Of Rajasthan (2026:Rj-Jd:5863) on 2 February, 2026
[2026:RJ-JD:5863]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 12396/2025
Sandeep S/o Shri Raju Ram, Aged About 19 Years, Chak 05 Umw
Umewala Goluwala Tehsil Pilibanga District Hanumangarh
(Presently Lodged At Dist. Jail Hanumangarh)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Though Pp
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rakesh Jakhar
Mr. Saddam Husain
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Urja Ram Kalbi, PP
Mr. C.R. Choudhary, for complainant
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAMIL KUMAR MATHUR
Order
02/02/2026
1. The petitioner has filed this bail application under Section
483 of BNSS in FIR No.150/2025 registered at Police Station
Goluwala, District Hanumangarh for offence under Sections 80(2)
& 80 of BNS.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned
Public Prosecutor and counsel for the complainant and perused the
material available on record.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner
has falsely been implicated in this case. He also submitted that
allegation against the present petitioner is for cruelty, for the
purpose of dowry as well as the dowry death. He again submitted
that in the present matter, trial has been commenced and material
witnesses have been recorded. The statement of complainant PW1
(Uploaded on 02/02/2026 at 05:25:25 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:5863] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-12396/2025]
Raj Kumar does not support the prosecution story, therefore, he
has turned hostile and other material witnesses PW2 Shanti
(mother of deceased), PW3 Sita Ram (grandfather of the
deceased) and PW4 Hanuman Prasad have also turned hostile.
Hence, there is no incriminatory evidence against the petitioner.
He further submits that in the present case, the parties have
entered into a compromise, to which the complainant has no
objection.
He again submits that the petitioner is behind the bars since
17.02.2025. The trial of the case may take considerable time and
no further custodial interrogation is required, hence the bail
application of the petitioner may be allowed.
4. Learned counsel for the complainant has acceded to the
arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner as also
factum of compromise and submits that he has no objection if the
petitioner is granted bail.
5. Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail
application.
6. On consideration of the rival submissions and material
available on record and in the light of submission made by learned
counsel for the petitioner but without expressing any opinion on
merits/demerits of the case, I am inclined to grant benefit of bail
to the petitioner.
7. Consequently, the bail application under Section 483
B.N.S.S. is allowed and it is directed that the petitioner Sandeep
S/o Shri Raju Ram, be released on bail provided he furnishes a
personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties in the
sum of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial
(Uploaded on 02/02/2026 at 05:25:25 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:5863] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-12396/2025]
court with the stipulation that he shall appear before that Court on
all subsequent dates of hearing till conclusion of the trial.
(PRAMIL KUMAR MATHUR),J
8-AnilKC/-
(Uploaded on 02/02/2026 at 05:25:25 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
