Badam Bai vs State PP — 163/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 483. Disposed: Contested--Bail Granted on 13th March 2026.

Case disposed

Bail Application

CNR: RJJW010004642026

Filing Number

373/2026

Filing Date

12-Mar-2026

Registration No

163/2026

Registration Date

12-Mar-2026

Court

DJ ADJ Jhalawar District HQ

Judge

11-District and Sessions Judge

Decision Date

13-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Bail Granted

Last updated 31-May-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

21

Police Station

Jhalawar Sadar

Year

2026

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 483

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Badam Bai

    Adv. Mr. Ramesh Chand Meghwal

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.State PP (Public Prosecutor)

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 13-Mar-2026

    OrderView PDF

  3. 13-Mar-2026

    OrderView PDF

  4. 13-Mar-2026

    OrderView PDF

  5. 13-Mar-2026

    OrderView PDF

  6. 13-Mar-2026

    OrderView PDF

    Case Summary: Badam Bai v. State of Rajasthan (CIS 163/2026) The Session Court granted bail to petitioner Badam Bai (age 42) in a murder case where her husband was shot and killed on January 24, 2026. The court found that while the FIR named other accused persons (Jagdish, Dulheshih, and others) with actual involvement in the shooting, the petitioner was not named in the original police report or identified by eyewitnesses in their statements. Observing that no evidence linked the petitioner to the crime and her criminal record was nil, the court approved bail on furnishing a bond of ₹50,000 or two sureties of ₹25,000 each. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  7. 13-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    District and Sessions Judge

  8. 12-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 163/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: Badam Bai v. State of Rajasthan (CIS 163/2026) The Session Court granted bail to petitioner Badam Bai (age 42) in a murder case where her husband was shot and killed on January 24, 2026. The court found that while the FIR named other accused persons (Jagdish, Dulheshih, and others) with actual involvement in the shooting, the petitioner was not named in the original police report or identified by eyewitnesses in their statements. Observing that no evidence linked the petitioner to the crime and her criminal record was nil, the court approved bail on furnishing a bond of ₹50,000 or two sureties of ₹25,000 each. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case