[2025:RJ-JP:30383] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 7793/2025 1. Sadrudeen S/o Fakrudeen, Aged About 41 Years, R/o Gali No. 4, Dargah Sampark Sadak Nagfani, Police Station Ganj, District Ajmer. 2. Mohammed Iqbal S/o Mohammed Ishaq, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Dargah Sampark Sadak Gali No. 9, Behind Madarsa, Longiya Mohallah, Police Station Ganj, District Ajmer. (Both Presently Confined At Central Jail Ajmer) ----Petitioners Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent Connected With S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 9885/2025 1. Badruddin S/o Fakruddin, Aged About 39 Years, R/o Gali No. 4, Dargah Sampark Sarak Nagfani, P.s. Ganj, District Ajmer. (At Present Confined In Central Jail Ajmer). 2. Gulam Nabi S/o Mohammed Ramzan, Aged About 20 Years, R/o Tarashah Nagar Nai Sarak, P.s. Ganj, District Ajmer. (At Present Confined In Central Jail Ajmer). 3. Shekh Tauhid S/o Shekh Mumtaz, Aged About 21 Years, R/o Tarashah Nagar Nai Sarak, P.s. Ganj, District Ajmer. (At Present Confined In Central Jail Ajmer). ----Petitioners Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ajay Gadhwal Mr. Sanjay Gangwar For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 07/08/2025 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.177/2025 registered at Police [2025:RJ-JP:30383] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-7793/2025] Station Ganj, District Ajmer (Raj.) for the offence punishable under Sections 189(2), 115(2), 126(2) & 109(1) of BNS. 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 all the injuries sustained to injured persons are simple in nature. Petitioners are in custody since their date of arrest & trial of the case will take considerable time. Further custody of the petitioners would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioners & submits that petitioners are habitual offender as several other 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 petitioners as also considering the nature of injuries; trial will take time in its conclusion as well as looking to the custody period, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it proper to allow the bail applications. 6. These bail applications are accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioners – 1) Sadrudeen S/o Fakrudeen, 2) Mohammed Iqbal S/o Mohammed Ishaq, 3) Badruddin S/o Fakruddin, 4) Gulam Nabi S/o Mohammed Ramzan & 5) Shekh Tauhid S/o Shekh Mumtaz shall be released on bail provided each of them furnishes a personal bond [2025:RJ-JP:30383] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-7793/2025] 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 they shall mark their presence once in three months in the concerned police station. 8. Concerned SHO is directed to maintain a register recording the attendance of the petitioners, as directed above. In case the petitioner 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 application and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J GAUTAM JAIN /154-155