[2025:RJ-JP:30326] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 7470/2025 Shubham Jangid @ Shubham Sharma S/o Shri Vijendra Kumar, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Village Mundiya, Tehsil Todabhim, P.s. Salimpur, District Gangapur City, Presently R/o Plot No. 33A, Shriram Vihar Colony, Bajri Mandi Road, P.s. Karni Vihar, Jaipur West. (Confined In Jaipur Jail ) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Hemant Kankoriya For Respondent(s) For Complainant(s) : : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP Mr. Aniruddh Pratap Singh HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 06/08/2025 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.84/2025 registered at Police Station Karni Vihar, District Jaipur (West) for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 119(1) & 110 of BNS. Investigation is being conducted for offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 119(1), 110 & 3(5) of BNS. 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 all the injuries sustained to injured are simple in nature. Prima facie, offence under Section 110 BNS is not made out. It is contended that petitioner is in custody since his date of [2025:RJ-JP:30326] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-7470/2025] arrest and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. Trial will take time in its conclusion. 3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor assisted by learned counsel for the complainant vehemently oppose the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner. They submit that though injuries sustained to injured are simple in nature but said injuries were caused on vital part of body. Apart from this, petitioner is a habitual offender as 13 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 parties, as also considering the nature of injuries and the fact that all the injuries sustained to injured are simple in nature as also 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 - Shubham Jangid @ Shubham Sharma S/o Shri Vijendra Kumar, 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:30326] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-7470/2025] 7. However, it is made clear that the petitioner shall not involve in similar offence(s) during currency of bail granted by this Court. The petitioner is further directed to mark his presence in the concerned police station in first and third week of every month, 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 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 petitioner 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 GAUTAM JAIN /430