[2025:RJ-JP:29727] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 7887/2025 1. Rajendra @ Rajesh S/o Jaina, Aged About 23 Years, R/o Ralayati, 2. Rajendra S/o Babu, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Ralayati, Police Station Sadar Jhalawar, District Jhalawar (Rajasthan) (At Present Confined District Jail Jhalawar). ----Accused-Petitioners Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ajay Singh Yaduvanshi, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP, with Mr. Tapesh Agarwal, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 04/08/2025 1. The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS on behalf of the petitioners, who have been arrested in connection with FIR No.133/2025 registered at Police Station Kotwali Jhalawar, District Jhalawar for the offence punishable under Section 309(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, (in short ‘BNS’) 2023. During course of investigation, offences punishable under Section 310(2) of BNS and Section 4/25 of Arms Act have also been added. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that the accused-petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. He submits that alleged offences are triable by Magistrate. He contends that charge-sheet has already been filed and trial will [2025:RJ-JP:29727] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-7887/2025] take considerable time in its conclusion. He argues that the petitioners are in custody since 28.02.2025 and 19.04.2025 respectively and 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 and submits that petitioners are habitual offenders as 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 parties, especially the fact that alleged offences are triable by Magistrate; charge-sheet has been filed 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 this bail application. 6. This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioners – 1. Rajendra @ Rajesh S/o Jaina, and 2. Rajendra S/o Babu 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. [2025:RJ-JP:29727] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-7887/2025] 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 a 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 MADAN/214