[2025:RJ-JP:39002] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 10053/2025 Manish Singh Shekhawat S/o Harisingh Shekhawat, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Village Bhonawas, Rajputo Ka Mohalla, Ward No. 7, Mandir Wali Gali, Thana Pragpura, Jaipur Rural. At Present Resident Of Plot No. 15-16, Surya Nagar, Nadi Ka Phatak, Bainad Road, Thana Kardhani, Jaipur (At Present In Central Jail Jaipur). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Lokesh Karuna Nidhi Gour For Respondent(s) : Mr. Manvendra Singh Choudhary, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN Order 17/09/2025 1. The present bail application under Section 483 of BNSS is filed by the applicant-accused Manish Singh Shekhawat S/o Harisingh Shekhawat seeking bail in respect of a criminal case registered as FIR No.171/2025 dated 01.04.2025 registered at P.S. Harmara, District – Jaipur West, for the offence under Sections 115(2), 126(2) and 189(2) of BNS. 2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the matter and the investigation against him is complete and he is no more required in investigation. He further submits that there are no chance of fleeing of applicant accused from the jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court. The applicant does not [2025:RJ-JP:39002] (2 of 4) [CRLMB-10053/2025] have any criminal antecedents. He also submits that the applicant undertakes not to repeat offence and cooperate with investigation/trial, which will take time. 3. Learned Counsel for petitioner submits that for incident of 31.03.2025, a report was lodged on 01.04.2025 after a delay of nearly 20 hours and without naming present petitioner in the report. He further submitted that the report clearly indicated that two persons, Vaibhav Ojha and Manish Puniyawal, were named as assailants along with other unnamed persons, but present petitioner was not among the named persons. He also submitted that after arrest of present petitioner, no Test Identification Parade (TIP) was conducted by police to verify about involvement of present petitioner. He further submitted that the brother of complainant is a history-sheeter of PS Kardhani and there is animosity between Vaibhav Ojha and Deepak Choudhary. He submitted that only because of animosity, present petitioner is implicated by police. He further submitted that three other criminal cases were registered against the petitioner, but none of them is of 2025. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application and submitted that the allegations are grave and serious in nature. He has also filed a report received from concerned Police Station. 5. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner-accused and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material placed on record by both the parties. [2025:RJ-JP:39002] (3 of 4) [CRLMB-10053/2025] 6. On the basis of report at 17:08 hours on 01.04.2025 by complainant Kuldeep Chaudhary for incident of 23.00 hours on 31.03.2025, police registered a report against Vaibhav, Manish, and others who assaulted Deepak and Kuldeep, both brothers. During investigation, police identified involvement of present petitioner, and also found that Vaibhav and Deepak are history-sheeters of PS Kardhani, and having animosity with each other. In the current assault, Deepak sustained five injuries, out of which injury nos. 3 and 4 were found grievous. The details mentioned by police indicate that due to previous assault upon Vaibhav by Deepak and his gang members developed animosity between them. The Police found that present petitioner, along with Vaibhav, Pushpendra, and another, assaulted Deepak and Kuldeep on 31.03.2025. The evidence and material clearly suggest that a total of four criminal cases, including the present one, were registered against the petitioner, and in three cases a charge sheet has been filed. It is also evident that release on bail would further enhance chances of gang war between these persons. 7. The facts and the material indicate that the alleged offence are of serious nature and role attributed to applicant is prima facie sufficient to consider complicity of applicant in the crime. Therefore, at this juncture, considering the evidence collected so far, this is not a fit case to enlarge the applicant accused on bail. [2025:RJ-JP:39002] (4 of 4) [CRLMB-10053/2025] 8. Considering the gravity of allegations and overall facts and circumstances of the case, it is appropriate to dismiss the bail application of the applicant accused at this stage. 9. Accordingly, the application for bail filed under Section 483 of BNSS preferred by Manish Singh Shekhawat S/o Harisingh Shekhawat is hereby dismissed. (ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J PREETI VALECHA /110