[2025:RJ-JP:28420] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 6860/2025 Pawan Gurjar S/o Shri Lalluram, Aged About 20 Years, R/o Village Khutla, Panchayat Khutla, Salona Gurjar Mohalla, Tehsil Gangapur City, Police Station Gangapur Sadar, District Sawai Madhopur, (At Present Confined In Central Jail, Jaipur). ----Accused-Petitioner Versus The State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent Connected With S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 6955/2025 Rajsingh Sikarwar S/o Shri Jagendra Singh, Aged About 22 Years, R/o Village Khutiyani Behad, Tehsil Jaura, Thana Bagcheeni, District Murena, Haal Kirayedaar Baba Property Bali Gali, Sector 26, Pratap Nagar, Thana Pratap Nagar, Jaipur East (Accused Is In Central Jail Jaipur). ----Accused-Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Amit Chaudhary, Adv., with Mr. Gaurav Meena, Adv., with Mr. Anshuman Saxena, Adv., and Mr. Indrajeet Chaudhary, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP with Mr. Tapesh Agarwal, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 28/07/2025 1. These instant bail applications have been filed under Section 483 of BNSS on behalf of the petitioners, who have been arrested in connection with FIR No.259/2025 registered at Police Station Pratap Nagar, District Jaipur City (East) for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 140(3) and 309(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, (in short ‘BNS’) 2023. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that the accused-petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. [2025:RJ-JP:28420] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-6860/2025] They submit that a simple case of hot talks has been converted into serious criminal offence. They further submit that alleged offences are triable by Magistrate. Learned counsel appearing of the accused-petitioner – Pawan Gurjar submits that he was not identified by the victim in the test identification parade. They contend that trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. They argue that the petitioners are in custody since 02.05.2025 and further custody of the petitioners would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners and submits that petitioners are habitual offender as other criminal cases have been registered against them. 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 parties, especially the fact that alleged offences are triable by Magistrate 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 these bail applications. 6. These bail applications are accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioners – 1. Pawan Gurjar S/o Shri Lalluram and 2. Rajsingh Sikarwar S/o Shri Jagendra Singh shall be released on bail provided each of them 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/- [2025:RJ-JP:28420] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-6860/2025] (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court with the stipulation that they 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-petitioners shall not involve in any other offence(s) during currency of the bail and they shall mark their presence in first week of every month in the concerned police station, till trial is concluded. 8. Concerned SHO is directed to maintain a register recording the attendance of the petitioners, as directed above. In case the petitioners fail to mark their 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 them by this Court. 10. Office is directed to send copy of this order to the concerned SHO for necessary compliance. 11. The observation made hereinabove is only for decision of the instant bail applications and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J MADAN/155-156