Back
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
[2026:RJ-JD:16331]
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 12044/2025
Mahaveer Singh S/o Pep Singh, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Badiyo Ki Nadi, Depida Nada, Beru, Police Station Rajiv Ghandi Nagar, Jodhpur, Raj. (At Present Lodged In Central Jail Jodhpur)
----Petitioner Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajiv Bishnoi Mr. Dinesh Kumar Bishnoi
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Hanuman Prajapati, PP with Mr. Ravindra Singh Bhati
Mr. Dhirendra Singh, Sr. Advocate assisted by Mr. Jagdish Singh, for complainant.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANEESH SHARMA
08/04/2026
Order
1. The present bail application has been preferred under Section 483 B.N.S.S. on behalf of the petitioner. The requisite details of the matter are tabulated herein below:-
| S.No. | Particulars of the case |
|---|---|
| 1. | FIR Number: 202/2024 |
| 2. | Concerned Police Station: Rajiv Gandhi Nagar |
| 3. | District: Jodhpur City West |
| 4. | Offences alleged in the FIR: Sections 103(1) & 61(2)(a) of BNS, 2023. |
| 5. | Offences added, if any: Section 3(5) of BNS, 2023 |
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case and the present FIR has been filed as a result of a sudden scuffle that broke out between the parties. He further submits that there are material contradictions in the statement of the witnesses and the petitioner has been roped in the present matter wholly on the basis of suspicion. He lastly submits that the chargesheet has already been filed in this matter and the trial will take considerable time to conclude; he therefore prays that the petitioner may kindly be enlarged on bail.
3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor and learned Senior counsel for the complainant have vehementally opposed the said request and submit that from court statements of the eye witnesses namely Amar Singh (PW/7) recorded on 06.06.2025 and Ram Kishore @ Oma Ram (PW/10) recorded on 12.08.2025, as well as from the analysis report of the CCTV footage dated 03.08.2024, it is well established that the petitioner has caused a head injury to the deceased, therefore prayed for dismissal of the present bail application.
4. Heard learned counsel for both parties and perused the material available on record.
5. Considering the facts of the case more particularly that from the court statements of the eye witnesses namely Amar Singh (PW/7) recorded on 06.06.2025 and Ram Kishore @ Oma Ram (PW/10) recorded on 12.08.2025, as well as from the analysis report of the CCTV footage dated 03.08.2024, it is evident that the petitioner has inflicted the blow on the head of the deceased Arjun Singh. Further the Post Mortem Report dated 22.07.2024, clearly mentions the cause of death of the deceased as ‘anti mortem head injury & its complications’. Thus, in view of the foregoing discussion and looking to the seriousness of the offence alleged in the FIR and direct evidence against the petitioner, I do not find any good reason to enlarge the petitioner on bail.
6. Accordingly, the bail application filed by the petitioner is hereby dismissed.
7. It is made it clear that the observations made hereinabove are only for deciding the present bail application without commenting on the merits/de-merits of the case, and shall not influence the trial of the case in any manner.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
