[2025:RJ-JP:30596] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 8359/2025 1. Omprakash Urf Omya Urf Mayaram Son Of Harji Urf Harjilal, Aged About 25 Years, Resident Of Jelmiya, Police Station Diggi, District Tonk (Raj.) 2. Kaluram Urf Kalu Urf Laxman Son Of Shankar, Aged About 29 Years, Resident Of Pathraj Khurd, Police Station Mor, District Tonk (Raj.). (At Present Confined In Sub-Jail, Bandikui) ----Accused-Petitioners Versus The State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Shantnu Bansal, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP with Mr. Tapesh Agarwal, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 07/08/2025 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.78/2025 registered at Police Station Kolwa, District Dausa for the offences punishable under Sections 331(4) and 305(a) of BNS, 2023. Now, investigation is being conducted for the offences punishable under Sections 331(4), 305(a) and 317(2) of BNS, 2023. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that the accused-petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. Learned counsel submits that alleged offences are triable by Magistrate. He contends that trial of the case will take [2025:RJ-JP:30596] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-8359/2025] considerable time in its conclusion. He argues that the petitioners are in custody since their date of arrest and further custody of the petitioners would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners. Learned Public Prosecutor submits that petitioners are habitual offenders 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 parties, especially the fact that alleged offences are triable by Magistrate 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-petitioners – 1. Omprakash Urf Omya Urf Mayaram Son Of Harji Urf Harjilal, and 2. Kaluram Urf Kalu Urf Laxman Son Of Shankar 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. 7. It is made clear that the accused-petitioners shall not involve [2025:RJ-JP:30596] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-8359/2025] 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/S-387