Sohanaram Alias Sovanaram vs State Of Rajasthan (2026:Rj-Jd:9078)
2026 Latest Caselaw 2743 Raj

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Sohanaram Alias Sovanaram vs State Of Rajasthan (2026:Rj-Jd:9078) on 18 February, 2026

Author: Kuldeep Mathur

Bench: Kuldeep Mathur

[2026:RJ-JD:9078]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
 S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous III Bail Application No. 12148/2025

Sohanaram Alias Sovanaram S/o Parta Ram, Aged About 27
Years, R/o Varli Fali Kundaal Police Thana Bali District Pali
(Presently Lodged In Sub Jail Bali)
                                                                     ----Petitioner
                                     Versus
1.       State Of Rajasthan, Through The Public Prosecuter
2.       Laccharam S/o Bhuraji, Aged About 22 Years, R/o
         Kundaal Bali District Pali Rajasthan
                                                                  ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)          :     Mr. Rishabh Handa
For Respondent(s)          :     Mr. Narendra Gehlot, PP



            HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR

Order

18/02/2026 This third application for bail under Section 483 BNSS (439

Cr.P.C.) has been filed by the petitioner who has been arrested in

connection with F.I.R. No.120/2023, registered at Police Station

Bali, District Pali, for offences under Sections 341, 323, 336,

307/34 of IPC; and Sections 4/25 of Arms Act.

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently

opposed the bail application.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner at the Bar and

perused the statements of the injured, Deetaram, recorded before

the competent Criminal Court as PW-15. This Court, prima facie,

finds that the specific allegation against the present petitioner is

that he inflicted repeated blows with an axe (kulhadi) on the vital

part of the body, namely the head of the injured Deetaram. The

(Uploaded on 18/02/2026 at 06:06:57 PM)

[2026:RJ-JD:9078] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-12148/2025]

injuries allegedly caused by the petitioner are stated to be

grievous in nature and dangerous to life.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner

has been in judicial custody for more than two and a half years

and, therefore, considering the prolonged period of incarceration,

he may be enlarged on bail.

However, having regard to the seriousness and gravity of the

allegations levelled against the petitioner and further considering

that the statements of only three remaining prosecution witnesses

are yet to be recorded before the competent Criminal Court, this

Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage.

Consequently, the present third bail application under

Section 483 of the BNSS (corresponding to Section 439 Cr.P.C.)

stands dismissed.

(KULDEEP MATHUR),J 188-himanshu/-

(Uploaded on 18/02/2026 at 06:06:57 PM)

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)