[2025:RJ-JP:23839] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 2nd Bail Application No. 3960/2025 Vikram Gurjar @ Laden S/o Shri Hansraj Gurjar, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Pahadi, Police Station Behror Sadar, District Kotputli. (At Present Confined In Central Jail Jaipur, District Jaipur). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Gordhan Singh Fauzdar For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP with Mr. Shubham Kumar Sain, AAAG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 30/06/2025 1. This second bail application under Section 483 of BNSS has been filed on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.303/2023 registered at Police Station Sanganer, District Jaipur City (East) (Raj.) for the offence punishable under Section 3/25 of Arms Act. After completion of investigation, police filed charge-sheet for the offence punishable under Section 3/25(1B)(a) of Arms Act. 2. The first bail application preferred on behalf of the petitioner was dismissed by co-ordinate bench of this court vide order dated 19.11.2024. 3. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. It is submitted that now 14 witnesses have been examined during the course of trial and none of the witnesses have identified the [2025:RJ-JP:23839] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-3960/2025] petitioner. According to the prosecution story, petitioner was sitting in the car with one girl and after seeing the police party, he managed to escape from the place of incident leaving behind a loaded country-made pistol. It is submitted that trial of the case will take considerable time as six more witnesses are required to be examined. Counsel contends that petitioner is in custody since 19.01.2024 and he is facing magisterial trial. Counsel thus, prays that looking to the period of incarceration suffered by the petitioner, this bail application may be accepted. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that first bail application preferred on behalf of the petitioner was dismissed by co-ordinate bench of this court after considering the criminal antecedents of the petitioner. Counsel further submits that there is no substantial change in circumstances. 5. I have considered the contentions. 6. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by both the parties, especially the fact that petitioner is facing magisterial trial since long and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion as well as looking to the custody period, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it proper to allow the second bail application. 7. This second bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner - Vikram Gurjar @ Laden S/o Shri Hansraj Gurjar, shall be released on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty [2025:RJ-JP:23839] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-3960/2025] 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. 8. However, considering the criminal antecedents of the petitioner, he shall not involve in similar offence(s) during currency of bail granted by this Court. The petitioner is further directed to mark his presence on every Monday in the concerned police station, till trial is concluded. 9. 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. 10. If breach of any 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 petitioner by this Court. 11. The observation made hereinabove 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 GAUTAM JAIN /49