[2025:RJ-JP:16525] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 2nd Bail Application No. 5149/2025 Mukesh @ Dholiya S/o Shri Budhram, Aged About 21 Years, R/o Sakray (Shakambhari) Police Station Gokulpura, District Sikar (Raj.) (At Present Confined In District Jail Sikar). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pradeep Bochaliya For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shriram Dhakad, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 21/04/2025 1. The 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.51/2025 registered at Police Station Kotwali-Sikar, District Sikar (Raj.) for the offences punishable under Section 111(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, (in short ‘BNS’) 2023 and Sections 3/25 & 6 of Arms Act. 2. First bail application of the petitioner was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 20.03.2025 with liberty to renew the prayer of bail after submission of result of investigation. Now, charge-sheet has been filed, thus this second bail application has been preferred. 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 other co-accused persons who were arrested along [2025:RJ-JP:16525] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-5149/2025] with the petitioner have already been granted benefit of bail by the learned trial court. It is contended that trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. Petitioner is in custody since 01.02.2025 and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that petitioner is a habitual offender as eight other cases have been registered against him. 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, material made available on record in the form of charge- sheet, so also considering the fact that other co-accused persons have already been granted benefit of bail by the learned trial court 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 - Mukesh @ Dholiya S/o Shri Budhram, 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, [2025:RJ-JP:16525] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-5149/2025] on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so. 8. 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 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 him by this Court. 11. The observations 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 GAUTAM JAIN /40