Jagram @ Jaggo vs State of Rajasthan Advocate - P P — 158/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 483. Disposed: Contested--Bail Granted on 10th March 2026.

Case disposed

Cr. Misc. Cases - CR. MISC

CNR: RJBR010004652026

Filing Number

370/2026

Filing Date

07-Mar-2026

Registration No

158/2026

Registration Date

09-Mar-2026

Court

DJ ADJ Baran HQ

Judge

3-Addl District and Sessions Judge I

Decision Date

10-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Bail Granted

Last updated 05-May-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

72

Police Station

Kelwara Police Station

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 483

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Jagram @ Jaggo

    Adv. Kamleshchand Dubey

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.State of Rajasthan Advocate - P P

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 10-Mar-2026

    OrderView PDF

    Summary The Additional District and Sessions Judge in Baran, Rajasthan granted bail to the accused Jagaram Urf Jaggo in a case involving charges under IPC Sections 307 (attempt to murder) and 112(2) (criminal intimidation). The court found that the complainant failed to identify the accused as the person involved in the incident, a co-accused received bail from the High Court, and the accused had been in custody for approximately two months without any substantive investigation progress. The bail was granted on furnishing two surety bonds of ₹25,000 each and a personal bond of ₹50,000. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 10-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Addl District and Sessions Judge I

  4. 07-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 158/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The Additional District and Sessions Judge in Baran, Rajasthan granted bail to the accused Jagaram Urf Jaggo in a case involving charges under IPC Sections 307 (attempt to murder) and 112(2) (criminal intimidation). The court found that the complainant failed to identify the accused as the person involved in the incident, a co-accused received bail from the High Court, and the accused had been in custody for approximately two months without any substantive investigation progress. The bail was granted on furnishing two surety bonds of ₹25,000 each and a personal bond of ₹50,000. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case