[2025:RJ-JP:11707] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 3822/2025 Vijendra S/o Harbanshi, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Naya Gaon Mafi, Police Station Halaina, District Bharatpur, Raj. ( At Present Confined In Sub Jail Laxmangarh, District Alwar) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Yogesh Singhal For Respondent(s) : Mr. Amit Kumar Gupta, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 12/03/2025 1. The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.195/2019 registered at Police Station Kathumar, District Alwar for the offences punishable under Sections 457 and 380 of IPC. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel submits that alleged offences are triable by Magistrate. It is submitted that co-accused persons of this case have already been granted benefit of bail by co-ordinate bench of this Court. It is contended that trial of the case will take considerable time in its conclusion. Petitioner is in custody since 25.02.2025 and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. [2025:RJ-JP:11707] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-3822/2025] 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that petitioner is a habitual offender as 10 other cases have been registered against him. 4. I have considered the contentions. 5. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner, especially the fact that alleged offences are triable by Magistrate, so also considering the fact that co- accused persons of this case have already been granted benefit of bail by co-ordinate bench of this Court and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion as well as looking to the period of custody, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it proper to allow the bail application. 6. 6. This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner – Vijendra S/o Harbanshi shall be released on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court with the stipulation that he shall appear before that Court and any Court to which the matter is transferred, on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so. 7. It is made clear that the accused-petitioner shall not involve in any other offence(s) during currency of the bail and he shall mark his presence in second week of every month in the [2025:RJ-JP:11707] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-3822/2025] concerned police station, till trial is concluded. 8. Concerned SHO is directed to maintain a register recording the attendance of the petitioner, as directed above. In case the petitioner fails to mark his presence in the concerned police station, as directed above, the concerned SHO is directed to immediately report the matter to the concerned Court in this regard. 9. If any breach of these conditions is reported or come to the notice of the Court, the same shall alone be a reason for the trial Court to cancel the bail granted to him by this Court. 10. The observation made herein above is only for decision of the instant bail application and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J pcg/997