Rajasthan High Court – Jodhpur
Chuna Ram vs State Of Rajasthan on 3 August, 2026
[2026:RJ-JP:36069]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
AT JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 8497/2025
CNR: RJHC010625052025 | URN: CRLMB / 17670U / 2025
Sadik Khan S/o Ramjan Khan, Aged About 30 Years, Resident Of
Mehlu, Police Station Gudamalani, District Barmer, Rajasthan.
(At Present Lodged In District Jail Barmer)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through The Public Prosecutor.
----Respondent
Connected With
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 9980/2025
CNR: RJHC010746592025 | URN: CRLMB / 20623U / 2025
1. Chuna Ram S/o Shankar, Aged About 38 Years, R/o
Village Bhimthal, P.s. Dhorimmina, District Barmer. (Both
Are Presently In Judicial Custody At District Jail, Barmer)
2. Dinesh S/o Kesha Ram, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Village
Bhimthal, P.s. Dhorimmina, District Barmer. (Both Are
Presently In Judicial Custody At District Jail, Barmer)
----Petitioners
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through PP
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Jagdish Singh
Mr. Dhirendra Singh
Mr. Siddharth Karwasra
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Surendra Bishnoi, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP SHAH
Order
03/08/2026
1. The applicants have filed the present bail applications under
Section 483 of BNSS being aggrieved against the order dated
03.06.2025 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge,
(Uploaded on 03/08/2026 at 06:29:42 PM)
(Downloaded on 03/08/2026 at 08:37:26 PM)
[2026:RJ-JP:36069] (2 of 5) [CRLMB-8497/2025]
No.1, Barmer, Rajasthan in Criminal Miscellaneous Case No.
350/2025 “Sadik Khan vs. State of Rajasthan” and the order dated
07.08.2025 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, No.2,
Barmer in Criminal Miscellaneous Case No.129/25 (595/2025)
“Chuna Ram & Anr. vs. State of Rajasthan“, whereby the bail
applications filed by the accused-applicants under Section 483 of
B.N.S.S. were rejected. The accused-applicants are behind the
bars, pursuant to the F.I.R. No.177/2023 registered at Police
Station Sadar Barmer, District Barmer, for the offences punishable
under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 307, 302, 450 and 120-B of
IPC.
2. Learned counsel for the applicant – Sadik Khan submits that,
as far as the applicant Sadik Khan is concerned, he was neither
named in the FIR nor was his name mentioned during the course
of recording of statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. (Section 180
BNSS). He further submits that the applicant has falsely been
implicated and the observation made by the learned Trial Court
with regard to the applicant evading arrest is without any basis as
initially investigation was kept pending against the applicant under
Section 173 Cr.P.C. (Section 193 BNSS). He further submits that
similarly situated Bhera Ram and Banshi Ram have already been
enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 21.02.2024 in S.B.
Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No.1553/2024 “Bhera Ram
& Anr. vs. State of Rajasthan”.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the applicants – Chuna Ram
and Dinesh submits that though they have been named in the FIR,
however, no recovery of any weapon has been made from them
(Uploaded on 03/08/2026 at 06:29:42 PM)
(Downloaded on 03/08/2026 at 08:37:26 PM)
[2026:RJ-JP:36069] (3 of 5) [CRLMB-8497/2025]
and no overt act has been assigned to them. He further asserts
that PW-15 Anita, who is the eye-witness, even has refused to
identify the applicants – Chuna Ram and Dinesh and also the co-
applicant Sadik Khan, which fact has been admitted by her in her
cross-examination. They, therefore, implore this Court to allow the
present bail applications.
4. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposes the bail
applications and asserts that as far as applicant Sadik Khan is
concerned, he was the owner of the vehicle in which the entire
criminal conspiracy was hatched and the same has been recovered
from him. He further submits that no recovery has been made
from co-accused Chuna Ram and Dinesh, however, they have been
named in the FIR itself. He is however not in a position to dispute
the fact that similarly situated Bhera Ram and Banshi Ram have
already been enlarged on bail by this Court on 21.02.2024.
5. Heard learned counsel for the applicants as well as the
learned Public Prosecutor and perused the material available on
record.
6. I have considered the arguments advanced by learned
counsel for the parties. Having regard to the facts and
circumstances of the case, as far as applicant – Sadik Khan is
concerend, he has not at all been named in the FIR and neither
the complainant Pata Ram had impleaded him in his statement
recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and though he had impleaded
the applicant during his examintion-in-chief, however, he did not
remain firm on the name of the applicant during his cross-
examination. As far as applicants Chuna Ram and Dinesh are
(Uploaded on 03/08/2026 at 06:29:42 PM)
(Downloaded on 03/08/2026 at 08:37:26 PM)
[2026:RJ-JP:36069] (4 of 5) [CRLMB-8497/2025]
concerned, though they have been named in the FIR, however, the
star eye-witness Anita, who was examined as PW-15 has neither
identified them in the Court nor she had identified co-applicant
Sadik Khan. Furthermore, considered the fact that no recovery has
been effected from any of the applicants except for the vehicle,
which admittedly is in ownership of the applicant Sadik Khan. The
co-accused Bhera Ram and Banshi Ram have already been
enlarged on bail by this Court on 21.02.2024 and that the case of
the applicant Sadik Khan stands on a far better footing than those
of Bhera Ram and Banshi Ram. Also considering the fact that the
applicants are behind the bars for more than 1 year, this Court
prima facie finds it to be a fit case to enlarge the accused-
applicants on bail.
6. Thus, without expressing any opinion on merits/demerits of
the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the accused-applicants
on bail.
7. Consequently, the bail applications under Section 483
B.N.S.S. are allowed. It is ordered that the accused-applicants;
(1) Sadik Khan S/o Ramjan Khan, (2) Chuna Ram S/o
Shankar, and (3) Dinesh S/o Kesha Ram arrested in
connection with F.I.R. No.177/2023 registered at Police Station
Sadar Barmer, District Barmer, shall be released on bail, if not
wanted in any other case, provided each of them furnishes a
personal bond of Rs.50,000/- and two sureties of Rs.25,000/-
each, to the satisfaction of learned Trial Court, for their
appearance before that Court on each & every date of hearing and
whenever called upon to do so till completion of the trial.
(Uploaded on 03/08/2026 at 06:29:42 PM)
(Downloaded on 03/08/2026 at 08:37:26 PM)
[2026:RJ-JP:36069] (5 of 5) [CRLMB-8497/2025]
8. It is further, made clear that findings recorded/observations
made herein-above are for limited purposes of adjudication of bail
applications and the same shall not prejudice the trial of the case
in any manner.
(SANDEEP SHAH),J
2-3/charul Gakhar
(Uploaded on 03/08/2026 at 06:29:42 PM)
(Downloaded on 03/08/2026 at 08:37:26 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
