[2025:RJ-JP:37132] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 11188/2025 1. Smt. Prem W/o Dhanna, Aged About 60 Years, R/o Bhim Nagar, Bayana, District Bharatpur, Presently Dera Pilupura, Police Station Sadar, Bayana, District Bharatpur (Rajasthan) (At Present Confined In District Jail Karauli). 2. Smt. Laxmi W/o Shri Madan, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Bhim Nagar, Bayana, Police Station Bayana, District Bharatpur, Presently Dera Pilupura, Police Station Sadar, Bayana, District Bharatpur (Rajasthan) (At Present Confined In District Jail Karauli). ----Petitioners Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Hari Krishana Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP with Mr. Gaurav Gupta, Asst. G.A. 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 petitioners, who have been arrested in connection with FIR No.245/2025 registered at Police Station Sapotra, District Karauli for offences punishable under Sections 316(2), 318(4), 303(2) and 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, (in short, ‘BNS’) 2023. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that the accused-petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel submits that no evidence is available on record against the petitioners and only on the basis of news published in the [2025:RJ-JP:37132] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-11188/2025] newspaper, arrest of the petitioners has been made through production warrant. It is submitted that alleged offences are triable by Magistrate. It is submitted that no stolen articles have been recovered from the possession of the petitioners. Learned counsel contends that trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. It is contended that petitioners are females and they are in custody since 06.08.2025 and further custody of the petitioners would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by the counsel for 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 petitioners, especially considering the fact that alleged offences are triable by Magistrate, so also the fact that petitioners are females 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 this bail application. 6. This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioners – (1) Smt. Prem W/o Dhanna, and (2) Smt. Laxmi W/o Shri Madan, shall be released on bail provided, each of them shall furnish 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 they shall appear before that Court and any court [2025:RJ-JP:37132] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-11188/2025] 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-petitioners shall not involve in any other offence(s) during currency of the bail and they shall mark their presence in first 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 petitioners, as directed above. In case the petitioners fail to mark their 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 them by this Court. 11. The observations made hereinabove are only for decision of the bail applications and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J CHARU SONI /162