[2025:RJ-JP:31670] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 9851/2025 Dipesh @ Deepu S/o Chhogaram @ Chhitarlal, R/o Village Neemthur Police Station Chhabra District Baran Rajasthan. (At Present Confined In Sub Jail Chhabara). ----Accused-Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kuldeep Bhatia, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP with Mr. Tapesh Agarwal, PP and Mr. Abdul Kalam Khan, Adv., for complainant. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 13/08/2025 1. The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.175/2025 registered at Police Station Chhabra, District Baran for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 189(2), 351(2) and 324(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, (in short ‘BNS’) 2023. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. It is submitted that the petitioner is not named in the FIR and he has been made accused in this case solely on the basis of police interrogation of the co-accused persons. It is contended that trial of the case will take considerable time in its conclusion. Counsel submits that petitioner is in custody since his date of arrest and [2025:RJ-JP:31670] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-9851/2025] further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor assisted by learned counsel for the complainant opposes the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. It is submitted that six injuries have been found on the person of the injured, out of which five have been opined as grievous in nature. 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 fact that petitioner is not named in the FIR 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 the bail application. 6. This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner – Dipesh @ Deepu S/o Chhogaram @ Chhitarlal 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. It is made clear that the accused-petitioner shall not involve in any other offence(s) during currency of the bail and he shall [2025:RJ-JP:31670] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-9851/2025] mark his presence in second 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 petitioner, as directed above. In case the petitioner fails to mark his 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. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the concerned SHO for necessary compliance. 10. 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 him by this Court. 11. The observations made hereinabove is only for the 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/136