YASH v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN
Court: High Court of Rajasthan
Bench: SUNIL BENIWAL
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Rajasthan judgment dated 2026-08-10. YASH v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
[2026:RJ-JP:37999] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S. B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 7854/2026 CNR: RJHC010580162026 | URN: CRLMB / 17217U / 2026 Yash S/o Kanwar Lal, Aged About 20 Years, R/o - Opposite Anjuman Sansthan, Sec-No. 5 Gandhinagar, Dist. Chittorgarh. (Presently Lodged At Dist. Jail Chittorgarh) ----Petitioner Versus State of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Umesh Kant Vyas For Respondent(s) : Mr. Urja Ram Kalbi, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL BENIWAL Order 10/08/2026 1. This application for bail has been filed by the petitioner under Section 483 of BNSS (old Section 439 of Cr. P. C. ). The requisite details of the matter are tabulated herein below: S. No. Particulars of the Case 1. FIR Number 208/2026 2. Date of lodging FIR 14. 05. 2026 3. Concerned Police Station Chittorgarh 4. District Chittorgarh 5. Offences alleged in the FIR Sections 115(2), 126(2) and 3(5) of BNS, 2023 6.
Offences added, if any Sections 109(1) and 118(2) of BNS, 2023 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case and false allegations have been levelled against him. He submits that the petitioner was not present at the time of incident. Even the injured – Jeet Singh, in [2026:RJ-JP:37999] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-7854/2026] his statement recorded under Section 180 BNSS has not stated that the petitioner caused injuries which is stated to be life threatening, the same is attributed to co-accused Jaideep. The petitioner is in judicial custody since 27. 05. 2026 and the trial will take sufficiently long time, therefore, he deserves to be enlarged on bail. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposes this bail application, however, he is not in a position to refute the fact that injury which is stated to be life threatening has been attributed to co-accused Jaideep. 4.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor and perused the material available on record. 5. Having considered the rival submissions, facts and circumstances of this case and after perusing the challan papers so also considering the fact that the injury which is stated to be life threatening, has been attributed to co-accused Jaideep and not to the present petitioner; the petitioner is in judicial custody since 27. 05. 2026 and that the prosecution has not expressed any apprehension qua the petitioner fleeing away from justice, in case he is enlarged on bail, in the considered opinion of this Court, no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner behind the bars for an indefinite period as the trial will take sufficiently long time. Thus, without expressing any opinion on merits/demerits of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the bail application filed by the petitioner deserves to be accepted. 6.
Accordingly, the bail application filed under Section 483 of BNSS is allowed. It is ordered that petitioner- Yash S/o Kanwar [2026:RJ-JP:37999] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-7854/2026] Lal shall be released on bail in connection with the aforesaid FIR; provided he executes personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/-with two sound and solvent sureties of Rs. 25,000/- each to the satisfaction of learned trial Court for his appearance before that court on each and every date of hearing and whenever called upon to do so till the completion of the trial. 7. It is however, made clear that findings recorded/observations made above are for limited purposes of adjudication of bail application. The trial court shall not get prejudiced by the same. (SUNIL BENIWAL),J 24/Amar Purohit
Source: Supreme Court eSCR. Dataset: Dattam Labs, CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.