[2025:RJ-JP:35112] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 10520/2025 Suresh @ Surya S/o Late Shri Ghanshyam, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Indra Colony, Bijaynagar, Police Station Bijaynagar, District Beawar. (At Present Central Jail Ajmer). ----Accused-Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Jiya Ur Rahman, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP with Mr. Tapesh Agarwal, PP and Mr. Mohammed Zubeir, Adv., for complainant. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 01/09/2025 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.204/2025 registered at Police Station Vijay Nagar, District Beawar for the offences punishable under Sections 189(2), 115(2), 126(2), 125, 324(3), 351(2) and 110 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. Learned counsel submits that there is omnibus allegation against the petitioner. He argues that dispute has already been resolved by the parties amicably. He contends that trial of the case will take considerable time in its conclusion. He argues that the petitioner is [2025:RJ-JP:35112] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-10520/2025] in custody since his date of arrest and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that petitioner is a habitual offender as eighteen other cases have been registered against the petitioner. Learned counsel for the complainant/injured does not dispute the factum of compromise. 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 the fact that dispute has been resolved by the parties amicably; there is no specific allegation against the petitioner to cause injury on the person of the injured 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 - Suresh @ Surya S/o Late Shri Ghanshyam 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. [2025:RJ-JP:35112] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-10520/2025] 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 mark his presence in first week of every month in the concerned police station. 8. Concerned SHO is directed to maintain a register recording the attendance of the petitioner. In case the petitioner fails to mark his presence in the concerned police station, the concerned SHO is directed to immediately report the matter to the concerned Court in this regard. 9. 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. 10. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the concerned SHO for necessary compliance. 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 MADAN/186