[2025:RJ-JP:30804] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 9167/2025 1. Salindra Nath @ Surendra Nath S/o Karmnath, Aged About 32 Years, Resident Of Vajeerpur Titana, Police Station Samalakha, District Panipath (Hariyana). (At Present Confined In District Jail, Beawar). 2. Amit Son Of Karmnath, Aged About 22 Years, Resident Of Vajeerpur Titana, Police Station Samalakha, District Panipath (Hariyana). (At Present Confined In District Jail, Beawar). ----Accused-Petitioners Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Shantnu Bansal, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Tapesh Agarwal, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 08/08/2025 1. This 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.142/2025 registered at Police Station Vijay Nagar, District Beawar for the offence punishable under Sections 304(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, (in short ‘BNS’) 2023. Now, investigation is being conducted in this matter for the offences punishable under Sections 304(2) and 61(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 [2025:RJ-JP:30804] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-9167/2025] Magistrate. He further submits that there is allegation against the petitioners of snatching Rs.32,500/-. He contends that charge- sheet has already been filed and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. He argues that the petitioners are in custody since 29.04.2025 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 two criminal cases have been registered against the petitioner No.1-Salindra Nath @ Surendra Nath. 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. Salindra Nath @ Surendra Nath S/o Karmnath, and 2. Amit Son Of Karmnath 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 [2025:RJ-JP:30804] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-9167/2025] 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 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-409