[2025:RJ-JP:20001] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 2nd Bail Application No. 5889/2025 Satish S/o Ramgopal, Aged About 50 Years, R/o Bahri Ka Pura, Police Station Diholi, District Dholpur (Raj.). (At Present Confined In District Jail, Dholpur). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Manish Kumar Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vivek Sharma, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 13/05/2025 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.266/2024 registered at Police Station Diholi, District Dholpur (Raj.) for the offences punishable under Sections 189(2), 115(2), 126(2), 351(2), 352, 333 & 303(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, (in short ‘BNS’) 2023. 2. First bail application of the petitioner was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to renew the prayer of bail after submission of result of investigation. Now, charge-sheet has been filed in this matter for the offences punishable under Sections 191(2), 190, 115(2), 126(2), 351(2), 352, 109(1) & 117(2) of BNS, 2023 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 [2025:RJ-JP:20001] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-5889/2025] submitted that cross-cases have been registered between the parties and both sides have sustained injuries. Counsel submits that there is allegation against the petitioner of causing injury on the head of injured namely- Neeraj by farsa however, it has been mentioned in the injury report that same has been caused by blunt object. It is submitted that the said farsa has not been recovered at the instance of the petitioner and according to the prosecution case, it has been alleged in the charge-sheet that a lathi has been recovered at the instance of the petitioner. It is further submitted that other co-accused persons namely- Ankit, Banwarilal, Banwari and Rajesh have already been granted benefit of bail by this court. There are no criminal antecedents against the petitioner and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. Petitioner is in custody since 20.01.2025 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 injury sustained by the injured has been opined as dangerous to life. 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 before me in the form of charge- sheet, so also considering the fact that cross-cases have been registered between the parties, there are no criminal antecedents against the petitioner and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion as well as looking to the custody period, but without [2025:RJ-JP:20001] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-5889/2025] 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 Satish S/o Ramgopal, 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. 8. The observations 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 /41