[2025:RJ-JP:34258] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 9552/2025 1. Banwari Lal Shekar S/o Mangilal, R/o Jhuwasa, P.s. Raithal, District Bundi (Raj.), Presently R/o Ramganjbalaji, P.s. Sadar Bundi District Bundi (Raj.) (At Present Confined In District Jail Bundi Raj.) 2. Siddhant S/o Kamlesh, R/o Baldevpura, Khatkad, P.s. Raithal, District Bundi (Raj.) (At Present Confined In District Jail Bundi Raj.) ----Petitioners Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Govind Lal Choudhary For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP with Mr. Tapesh Agarwal, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 28/08/2025 1. Learned counsel for the petitioners seeks permission to withdraw the instant bail application qua accused-petitioner No.1- Banwari Lal Shekar S/o Mangilal with liberty to renew the prayer for bail after recording testimony of all the victims of this case. 2. Permission sought for is granted. 3. Accordingly, this bail application stands dismissed as withdrawn qua accused-petitioner No.1 with liberty as prayed for. 4. Learned trial Court is directed to record the testimony of victims on priority basis. 5. So far as accused-petitioner No.2 namely Siddhant S/o Kamlesh is concerned, he has filed the instant bail application [2025:RJ-JP:34258] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-9552/2025] under Section 483 of BNSS. The petitioner is in custody in connection with FIR No.96/2025 registered at Police Station Sadar Bundi, District Bundi (Raj.) for the offences punishable under Sections 143(2), 143(3), 127(2) & 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, (in short ‘BNS’) 2023. 6. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. It is submitted that petitioner is neither named in the FIR nor victims have named him in their statement. It is contended that there are no criminal antecedents against the petitioner and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. Counsel submits that petitioner is in custody since his date of arrest and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 7. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner. 8. I have considered the contentions. 9. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner, especially considering the material available before me in the form of case diary, as also considering the fact that as per statement of victims, main allegation is against co-accused namely- Banwari Lal Shekhar and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion as well as looking to the custody period, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it proper to allow the bail application. 10. This bail application is accordingly partly allowed and it is [2025:RJ-JP:34258] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-9552/2025] directed that accused-petitioner – Siddhant S/o Kamlesh 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. 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 GAUTAM JAIN /119