[2025:RJ-JP:30813] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 9248/2025 1. Sahil Dhabhai S/o Shri Rohitash Dhabai, Aged About 39 Years, R/o House No. J-1/3 L.I.C. Flat, Sector - 2, P.S. Vidyadhar Nagar, Jaipur. (Central Jail Jaipur). 2. Manish Prajapat S/o Shri Kailash Prajapat, Aged About 29 Years, R/o 4-A, Maharaj Colony, Teen Dukan, Dehar Ka Balaji, Sikar Road, P.S. Murlipura, Jaipur. (Central Jail Jaipur). 3. Radheyshayam Chandak S/o Shri Shrilal Chandak, Aged About 42 Years, R/o Flat No. 518, Ramaheritage Central Spine, P.S. Vidyadhar Nagar, Jaipur, Rajasthan. (Central Jail Jaipur). ----Accused-Petitioners Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. S.S. Hora, Adv., with Mr. T.C. Sharma, Adv., & Mr. Ishan Khandelwal, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP with Mr. Tapesh Agarwal, PP and Dr. Mithlesh Kumar, Adv., for complainant. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 08/08/2025 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.303/2025 registered at Police Station Vidhyadhar Nagar, District Jaipur City (North) for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 118(1), 126(2), 351(2) and 351(3) of BNS, 2023. [2025:RJ-JP:30813] (2 of 4) [CRLMB-9248/2025] 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 the injuries sustained by the injured have been opined as dangerous to life. He further submits that according to the medical opinion given on 03.07.2025, injury No.3 which is fracture of 4th metacarpal bone of the right hand has been opined as grievous in nature. So far as, injury Nos.1 and 2, are concerned, it has been stated by the medical expert that opinion will be given after complete healing of the wounds however, X-ray report suggests that there is no bony injury. He contends that trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. He argues that the petitioners are in custody since 07.07.2025 and further custody of the petitioners would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor assisted by learned counsel for the complainant vehemently opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioners. It is submitted that nature of injuries is not a sole criteria to make out the case under Section 307 of IPC as several other factors like nature of weapon, part of body and number of injuries are also required to be taken into consideration. 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 considering the material available on record in the form of case diary including injury reports, nature of allegation & role attributed to the petitioners and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion as well as [2025:RJ-JP:30813] (3 of 4) [CRLMB-9248/2025] 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. Sahil Dhabhai S/o Shri Rohitash Dhabai, 2. Manish Prajapat S/o Shri Kailash Prajapat and 3. Radheyshayam Chandak S/o Shri Shrilal Chandak 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 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 [2025:RJ-JP:30813] (4 of 4) [CRLMB-9248/2025] 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 observations made hereinabove are 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-413