[2025:RJ-JP:29834] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 8165/2025 1. Ajam S/o Mubareek, Aged About 20 Years, Resident Of Ward Number 43, Mohalla Khora, Police Station Kotwali Jhunjhunu, District Jhunjhunu (Raj.) 2. Asif S/o Mohmad Arif, Aged About 22 Years, Resident Of Ward Number 43, Mohalla Khora, Police Station Kotwali Jhunjhunu, District Jhunjhunu (Raj.) (Accused Presently Confined In District Jail Jhunjhnu) ----Accused-Petitioners Versus The State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Deepak Soni, 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.385/2024 registered at Police Station Kotwali Jhunjhunu, District Jhunjhunu for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 341, 379, 504, 506 and 143 of IPC. During course of investigation, offence punishable under Section 308/34 of IPC has 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 none of injuries sustained to injured have been opined as dangerous to life. He further submits that co-accused of [2025:RJ-JP:29834] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-8165/2025] this case has already been granted benefit of bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court. He contends that trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. He argues that the petitioners are in custody since 11.06.2025 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 other cases have also been registered against the petitioners, however, he fairly concedes that benefit of bail has been granted to the petitioners in those cases. 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 none of injuries sustained to injured have been opined as dangerous to life; co- accused of this case has been granted benefit of bail by a Co- ordinate Bench of this Court 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. Ajam S/o Mubareek, and 2. Asif S/o Mohmad Arif 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 [2025:RJ-JP:29834] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-8165/2025] 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 every three months 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/257