[2025:RJ-JP:9895] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 9341/2024 1. Ayub S/o Chanda, R/o Gram Ghagwadi, Police Station Kaithwada, District Deeg. 2. Rasid S/o Daud, R/o Gram Ghagwadi, Police Station Kaithwada, District Deeg. 3. Rasid S/o Kamal, R/o Gram Ghagwadi, Police Station Kaithwada, District Deeg. 4. Ajij S/o Aasu, R/o Gram Ghagwadi, Police Station Kaithwada, District Deeg. 5. Sahid S/o Juhar Khan, R/o Gram Ghagwadi, Police Station Kaithwada, District Deeg. ----Petitioners Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rahul Sinsinwar For Respondent(s) : Mr. Manvendra Singh, PP Mr. Rohit Khandelwal for complainant HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR Order 05/03/2025 1. Apprehending their arrest in connection with FIR No. 59/2024 registered at Police Station Kaithwada, District Deeg for the offence(s) under Sections 143, 323, 341, 452, 379 and 427 of IPC, the accused-petitioners have preferred this anticipatory bail application under Section 482 BNSS. 2. Learned counsel for the accused-petitioners submit that accused-petitioners have falsely been implicated in the case. He further submits that the accused-petitioners have lodged a cross case against the complainant party as they also sustained multiple [2025:RJ-JP:9895] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-9341/2024] injuries. It is also contended that in both the cases, accused- petitioners and the complainant have arrived at amicable solution, custodial interrogation of the petitioners is not required. It is also contended that the accused-petitioners are ready and willing to cooperate with the investigation, therefore, anticipatory bail of the accused-petitioners may be allowed. 3. Learned counsel for the complainant concedes that the accused-petitioners and the complainant have arrived at compromise and if the anticipatory bail application of the accused- petitioners is allowed then the complainant has no objection. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposes the anticipatory bail application. It is contended that the accused- petitioners caused fatal injuries to injured Mustafa and Ali Mohammad, therefore, considering the allegations levelled in the FIR, the anticipatory bail application of the accused-petitioners may be dismissed. 4. Heard and perused the material available on record. 5. Learned Trial Court in the impugned order dated 10.07.2024 has recorded the fact that both the injured have submitted an affidavit incorporating the fact that they were not able to see which of the accused caused the injuries, therefore, considering the above facts and taking into consideration that both the parties have arrived at compromise and the complainant has no objection regarding granting of the anticipatory bail application, I deem it just and proper to allow the anticipatory bail application of the accused-petitioners. 6. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application under Section [2025:RJ-JP:9895] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-9341/2024] 482 BNSS is allowed and it is ordered that in the event of arrest of the petitioners namely- 1. Ayub S/o Chanda, 2. Rasid S/o Daud, 3. Rasid S/o Kamal, 4. Ajij S/o Aasu, 5. Sahid S/o Juhar Khan, in connection with FIR No. 59/2024 registered at Police Station Kaithwada, District Deeg, they shall be released on bail, provided each of them furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the S.H.O/I.O/Arresting Officer of the concerned Police Station on the following conditions:- (i) that the petitioners shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (ii) that the petitioners shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the court or any police officer, and (iii) that the petitioners shall not leave India without previous permission of the court. (PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J Keshav/99