[2025:RJ-JP:37000] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 11041/2025 Shailesh Kumar S/o Shri Bharatlal, Aged About 24 Years, R/o Ra- nipura, Police Station Sapotra, District Karauli (Raj.). (The Ac- cused Petitioner Presently Confined In District Jail, Karuali) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajneesh Gupta For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP with Mr. Gaurav Gupta, Assistant GA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 11/09/2025 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.254/2025 registered at Police Station Sapotra, District Karauli for offences punishable under Sections 109(1), 121(1), 132, 324(3), 324(5) & 324(6) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, (in short ‘BNS’) 2023, Section 19/54 of Rajasthan Excise Act, 1950 and Section 3 of The Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Learned counsel submits that it is a case of no injury. Counsel submits that though one other case was registered against the petitioner but he has been acquitted in that case by the learned trial court vide judgment dated 10.12.2024. It is contended that trial will take [2025:RJ-JP:37000] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-11041/2025] considerable time in its conclusion. Counsel submits that petitioner is in custody since 09.08.2025 and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner. 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 petitioner, especially considering the fact that it is a case of no injury and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion as well as looking to the custody period, 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 – Shailesh Kumar S/o Shri Bharatlal 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. However, it is made clear that the petitioner shall not involve in similar offence(s) during currency of bail granted by this Court. The petitioner is further directed to mark his presence in the concerned police station once in three months, till trial is concluded. [2025:RJ-JP:37000] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-11041/2025] 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. If breach of any 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 the petitioner 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 GAUTAM JAIN /150