[2025:RJ-JP:28450] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 7474/2025 Banwari S/o Hanuman, R/o Kadera, Police Station Chaksu, District Jaipur. (Presently Confined At Central Jail Jaipur). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Anshul Yadav For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP Mr. Tapesh Agarwal, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 28/07/2025 1. The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No. 147/2019 registered at Police Station Phagi, District Jaipur Gramin for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 341, 332, 353, 382, 307 of IPC. After completion of investigation, police filed charge-sheet in this matter for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 341, 332, 353, 382, 307 & 395 of IPC and Section 4/21 of Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957. 2. 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 have already been granted benefit of bail by co-ordinate bench of this Court by observing that all the injuries sustained by the injured- Jhabar [2025:RJ-JP:28450] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-7474/2025] Singh are simple in nature. It is contended that trial of the case will take considerable time in its conclusion. Counsel submits that petitioner is in custody since 02.02.2024 and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that petitioner is a habitual offender as 11 other cases have been registered against him. 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 petitioner, especially considering the fact that all the injuries sustained by the injured are simple in nature and other co-accused persons have already been granted benefit of bail by co-ordinate bench of this court and trial will take 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 the bail application. 6. This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner – Banwari S/o Hanuman 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. [2025:RJ-JP:28450] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-7474/2025] 7. 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. 8. 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. 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 him 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 application and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J pcg/187