[2025:RJ-JP:12419] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 299/2025 Pradeep Soni S/o Shri Munshi Lal, Aged About 26 Years, R/o Katchi Basti, Chattri Yojna, Atteed Ps Christianganj, Ajmer (Presently Accused Petitioner Confined In Central Jail Ajmer). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Krishan Gopal Khatri For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP Mr. Vijay Kumar Jangid for complainant HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 18/03/2025 1. The instant application for bail under Section 483 of BNSS has been filed on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.614/2024 PS Christian Ganj, Ajmer for offences under Sections 189(2), 115(2), 126(2), 352, 310(2), 140(3), 62, 326 (g) and 351 (3) BNS, 2023. After completion of investigation, police has filed charge sheet in the court concerned. 2. Learned counsel for the accused petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. He submits that omnibus allegations have been levelled against the petitioner. He contends that initially, scuffle took place between Pradeep Soni, petitioner herein, Devraj Gurjar, Deva and Deepak @ Deepu Soni and the staff working at Khanpur petrolpump over online payment [2025:RJ-JP:12419] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-299/2025] transaction. As per the petrolpump workers, online payment of Rs.500/-, made by the aforesaid accused persons was not received to them. Over this petty dispute, quarrel erupted between them. By exaggerating this small incident, it is alleged in the FIR that the accused persons snatched gold chain from one Yatindra and tried to abduct him forcefully in the car and that they set one unit of their petrolpump on fire by throwing inflammable substance. However, the workers used fire extinguishers and controlled it. Learned counsel further contends that there is no specific role attributed to the accused petitioner in the alleged incident. He aruges that even in the CCTV footage, recorded during the course of investigation clearly shows that the petitioner herein who is sitting on the driver seat, came out of the car and tried to intervene and pacify the matter and made accused Deva Gurjar and Devraj @ Deva to sit in the car. Main allegations are not appearing against the petitioner. Learned counsel contends that after completion of investigation, charge sheet has been filed. The petitioner is in custody since his dates of arrest whereas trial will take time in its conclusion. 3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor assisted by learned counsel for the complainant has opposed the submissions made by the counsel for the petitioner. It is submitted that there are serious allegations against the accused persons as they set one unit of the petrolpump on fire. However, the staff working on petrolpump somehow extinguished the fire and controlled it. This act of the accused persons may cause a big unfortunate happening. Learned counsel submits that looking to the [2025:RJ-JP:12419] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-299/2025] seriousness of the allegations, bail should not be granted the accused petitioner. 4. I have considered the contentions. 5. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the arguments advanced at bar and material made available before me in the form of charge sheet; role attributed to the accused petitioner; absence of criminal antecedents and trial will take time in its conclusion 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-petitioner Pradeep Soni S/o Shri Munshilal shall be released on bail provided he 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 he 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. The observation made hereinabove is just for decision of this bail application and would not prejudice trial in any manner. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J GAUTAM JAIN /733