Joga Ram vs State Of Rajasthan on 6 April, 2026

Rajasthan High Court – Jodhpur

Joga Ram vs State Of Rajasthan on 6 April, 2026

        HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                         JODHPUR
      S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 2805/2026

Joga Ram S/o Bharu Ram, Aged About 43 Years, R/o Godaron Ka
Tala, Leelsar, P.s. Chouhatan, District Barmer. (At Present Lodged
Dist. Jail Barmer)
                                                                     ----Petitioner
                                      Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor
                                                                   ----Respondent


For Petitioner(s)           :     Mr. R.J. Poonia
For Respondent(s)           :     Mr. Hanuman Prajapati, PP with
                                  Mr. Ravindra Singh Bhati



             HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANEESH SHARMA

Order

06/04/2026

SPONSORED

1. The present bail application has been preferred under

Section 483 B.N.S.S., 2023, on behalf of the petitioner. The

requisite details of the matter are tabulated herein below:

S.No.                           Particulars of the Case

 1.     FIR Number                             149/2021
 2.     Concerned Police Station               Chouhatan
 3.     District                               Barmer
 4.     Offences alleged in the FIR            Under Sections 143, , ,
                                               , , ,  of IPC,
                                               1860
 5.     Offence(s) added, if any,              Under Sections 147, , ,
                                               ,  of IPC, 1860

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner

has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that

(Uploaded on 06/04/2026 at 05:42:40 PM)
(Downloaded on 06/04/2026 at 08:48:50 PM)
(2 of 3) [CRLMB-2805/2026]

the police have not made out a case against the petitioner in the

charge-sheet, which was filed against other accused persons. He

also submits that the FIR is a result of a sudden quarrel over

boundary dispute and there was no intention to commit any

offence. He further submitted that the other co-accused have

already been enlarged on bail by Co-ordinate Benches of this

Court vide order dated 14.07.2021 in S.B. CRLMB No. 8960/2021

(Jasu Ram) and order dated 29.06.2021 in S.B. CRLMB No.

8285/2021 (Jassa Ram), and the case of the petitioner stands on

better footing to enlarge on bail. He also submits that the

petitioner is in judicial custody since 19.02.2026 and the trial of

the case will take long time to conclude, therefore, the bail

application of the petitioner may kindly be allowed.

3. Learned Public Prosecutor and the counsel for the

complainant vehemently opposed the bail application and the

benefit of bail should not be granted to the petitioner.

4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

material available on record.

5. Considering the facts of the case, more particularly that the

that the FIR is a result of a sudden quarrel over boundary dispute

and there was no intention to commit any offence; that the other

co-accused have already been enlarged on bail by Co-ordinate

Benches of this Court vide order dated 14.07.2021 in S.B. CRLMB

No. 8960/2021 (Jasu Ram) and order dated 29.06.2021 in S.B.

CRLMB No. 8285/2021 (Jassa Ram), and the case of the petitioner

stands on better footing; the petitioner is in judicial custody since

19.02.2026 and there is high probability that the trial of the case

(Uploaded on 06/04/2026 at 05:42:40 PM)
(Downloaded on 06/04/2026 at 08:48:50 PM)
(3 of 3) [CRLMB-2805/2026]

will take considerable time to conclude, therefore, I deem it

appropriate to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the present matter.

6. Considering the total facts and circumstances of the case. I

deem it appropriate to enlarge the petitioner in the present

matter.

7. Accordingly, this bail application filed under Section 483

B.N.S.S., 2023 is allowed and it is ordered that the accused- Joga

Ram S/o Bharu Ram, shall be enlarged on bail provided he

furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two

sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial

Court for his appearance before the court concerned on all the

dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.

8. The petitioner shall also not tamper with any evidence nor

would he directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or

promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as

to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or any

police officer.

9. 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.

(MANEESH SHARMA),J
29-simran/-

(Uploaded on 06/04/2026 at 05:42:40 PM)
(Downloaded on 06/04/2026 at 08:48:50 PM)

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)