[2025:RJ-JP:33011] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 9747/2025 Vinod Kumar S/o Meghram, Aged About 24 Years, R/o Ballupura, Police Station Mahwa, District Dausa. (At Present Confined In District Jail Dausa, District Dausa). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent Connected With S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 10262/2025 Arjun Meena S/o Alop Singh, Aged About 20 Years, R/o Manderu, Police Station Todabheem, District Karauli. (At Present In District Jail, Dausa). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mukesh Kumar Meena Mr. Ravindra Singh Shekhawat For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP Mr. Jagdish Prasad, SI, P.S. Mahuwa, Dausa HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 21/08/2025 1. These instant bail applications have been filed under Section 483 of BNSS on behalf of the petitioners, who have been arrested in connection with FIR No.198/2025 registered at Police Station Mahuwa, District Dausa (Rajasthan) for the offences punishable under Sections 189(2), 115(2), 126(2), 140(2) & 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, (in short ‘BNS’) 2023. [2025:RJ-JP:33011] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-9747/2025] 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel submit that petitioners are not named in the FIR and they have been made accused solely on the basis of information received by the police from the informer. Counsel submit that despite the fact that petitioners are not named in the FIR, arrest of the petitioners was made without conducting any test identification parade in this matter. It is submitted that trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. Petitioners are in custody since their date of arrest and further custody of the petitioners would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by counsel for the petitioners. He submits that motorcycle of the victim has been recovered at the instance of the petitioners. 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, as also the fact that petitioners are not named in the FIR; no memo of test identification parade is available in case diary; 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 fit and proper to allow these bail applications. 6. These bail applications are accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioners -(1) Vinod Kumar S/o Meghram & (2) Arjun Meena S/o Alop Singh shall be released on bail provided each of them furnishes a personal bond in the [2025:RJ-JP:33011] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-9747/2025] 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. The observations made hereinabove are only for decision of the instant bail applications and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J LALIT MOHAN /184-185