[2025:RJ-JP:37486] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 6744/2025 Biramchand S/o Tulsiram, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Madanpuriya Police Station Ghatoli District Jhalawar (Raj) (At Present Confined In Sub District Jail Aklera District Jhalawar(Raj) ----Accused-Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent Connected With S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 7612/2025 1. Omprakash @ Prakash S/o Radheyshyam, Aged About 23 Years, R/o Jamuniya, Police Station Ghatoli, District Jhalawar (Raj.) 2. Rakesh S/o Mohanlal, Aged About 22 Years, R/o Sarda, Police Station Bhalta, District Jhalawar (Raj.) (Presently Accused Confined In District Jail Jhalawar). ----Accused-Petitioners Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rohit Khandelwal, Adv., and Mr. Rajveer Singh Jhala, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP with Mr. Gaurav Gupta, Asstt.G.A. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 15/09/2025 1. These bail applications have been filed under Section 483 of BNSS on behalf of the petitioners, who have been arrested in connection with FIR No.129/2025 registered at Police Station Bhalta, District Jhalalwar for the offences punishable under [2025:RJ-JP:37486] (2 of 4) [CRLMB-6744/2025] Sections 331(7), 305(a), 109(2) and 3(5) of BNS, 2023. After completion of investigation, police filed charge-sheet in this matter. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that the accused-petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. Learned counsel submit that petitioners have been made accused in this case solely on the basis of police interrogation of the co- accused. They argue that no test identification parade has been conducted with regard to the petitioners. They further argue that offence under Section 109(2) of BNS, 2023 (corresponding to Section 307 of IPC) is not made out and all the injuries are simple in nature. They contend that charge-sheet has already been filed and trial of the case will take considerable time in its conclusion. They further contend that the petitioners are in custody since their date of arrest 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 three other cases have been registered against the petitioner- Biramchand. 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 petitioners, especially the fact that no test identification parade has been conducted with regard to the petitioners; charge-sheet has been filed and trial will take time in its conclusion as well as looking to the period of custody, but [2025:RJ-JP:37486] (3 of 4) [CRLMB-6744/2025] 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. Biramchand S/o Tulsiram, 2. Omprakash @ Prakash S/o Radheyshyam, and 3. Rakesh S/o Mohanlal 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/- (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 petitioners 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. [2025:RJ-JP:37486] (4 of 4) [CRLMB-6744/2025] 10. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the concerned SHO for necessary compliance. 11. The observation made hereinabove is only for decision of these bail applications and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J MADAN/S-198-199