[2025:RJ-JP:6977] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 144/2025 Kaushalya Devi W/o Mahendra Singh, Aged About 55 Years, R/o Bagariya Ki Dhani, Tan Gudha Bawni, Police Station Gudha Gorji, District Jhunjhunu (Raj.). (At Present Confined In District Jail Jhunjhunu) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent Connected With S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 2279/2025 Mahendra Singh Son Of Sanwalram, Aged About 55 Years, Resident Of Bagdiya Ki Dhani, Gudha Bavni, Police Station Gudhagorji, District Jhunjhunu (Raj.) (At Present In District Jail Jhunjhunu) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Intjar Ali Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Mahala For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP Mr. Gaurav Gupta, Asst. Gov. Adv. Mr. Vijay Punia, for complainant HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 17/02/2025 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.583/2024 registered at Police Station Gudha, District Jhunjhunu for the offences under Sections 189(2), 115(2), 126(2), 125 & 351(3) of BNS. Investigation is being [2025:RJ-JP:6977] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-144/2025] conducted for offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 125, 351(3), 110 & 3(5) 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 there was petty dispute between the parties and same has been resolved amicably by them. It is submitted that none of the injuries has been opined as dangerous to life. Learned counsel contends that petitioners have no criminal antecedents and both are in custody since 17.12.2024. It is contended that further custody of the petitioners would not serve any fruitful purpose. Charge-sheet has been filed and trial will take time in its conclusion. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the complainant does not dispute the factum of compromise. 5. I have considered the contentions. 6. 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 fact that dispute has been resolved amicably by the parties; petitioners have no criminal antecedents; they are in custody since 17.12.2024, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it proper to allow these bail applications. 7. These bail applications are accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioners (1) Kaushalya Devi W/o Mahendra Singh, & (2) Mahendra Singh Son Of Sanwalram, [2025:RJ-JP:6977] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-144/2025] 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. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J CHARU SONI /147-148