JETHARAM vs STATE Advocate - PUBLIC PROSECUTOR — 112/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 483. Disposed: Contested--Bail Granted on 13th March 2026.
Bail Application
CNR: RJBA010004842026
Filing Number
375/2026
Filing Date
11-03-2026
Registration No
112/2026
Registration Date
11-03-2026
Court
DJ ADJ Balotra District HQ
Judge
1-District and Sessions Judge
Decision Date
13th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Bail Granted
FIR Details
FIR Number
38
Police Station
SIWANA POLICE STATION
Year
2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
JETHARAM
Adv. RAJENDRA PAL SINGH
Respondent(s)
STATE Advocate - PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
Hearing History
Judge: 1-District and Sessions Judge
Disposed
Arguments on Applications / Bail Applications / Arguments in Misc. Proceedings
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 13-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 12-03-2026 | Arguments on Applications / Bail Applications / Arguments in Misc. Proceedings |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: Jetharam v. State of Rajasthan (Case 112/2026) The Session Court, Balotara granted bail to petitioner Jetharam under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for offenses under Sections 318(4) and 316(2) of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023. The court found that Jetharam was named in the FIR but no concrete evidence linked him to the alleged cargo theft scheme; his arrest on 24.02.2026 was deemed premature given investigation time requirements and the absence of serious charges against him, especially since a co-accused's bail was already approved. The court imposed bail conditions requiring personal bonds of ₹50,000 and two sureties of ₹25,000 each. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: Jetharam v. State of Rajasthan (Case 112/2026) The Session Court, Balotara granted bail to petitioner Jetharam under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for offenses under Sections 318(4) and 316(2) of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023. The court found that Jetharam was named in the FIR but no concrete evidence linked him to the alleged cargo theft scheme; his arrest on 24.02.2026 was deemed premature given investigation time requirements and the absence of serious charges against him, especially since a co-accused's bail was already approved. The court imposed bail conditions requiring personal bonds of ₹50,000 and two sureties of ₹25,000 each. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts