[2025:RJ-JP:38678] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 11929/2025 1. Mukhram S/o Roopsingh, Aged About 50 Years, R/o Kesra Ka Was, Police Station Mandawar, District Dausa (Raj.) (At Present Confined At District Jail Dausa). 2. Hemraj @ Shunt S/o Hariram, Aged About 23 Years, R/o Salimpur, Police Station Mahuwa, District Dausa, (Raj.) (At Present Confined At District Jail Dausa). ----Petitioners Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mukesh Kumar Meena For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vijay Singh Yadav, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR Order 19/09/2025 1. The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 BNSS on behalf of accused-petitioners. The petitioners have been arrested in connection with FIR No.235/2025 registered at Police Station Mandawar (Dausa), District Dausa for the offence(s) under Sections 190, 191(2), 191(3), 109(1), 303(2) and 324(4) of BNS and Sections 3/25 and 5/27 of Arms Act. 2. Learned counsel for the accused-petitioners submits that the accused-petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that no one received any injuries. It is also contended that the allegation of using fire arm is made against Narpat Gurjar and Mahendra and no allegation of using fire arm is made against the accused-petitioner. The petitioners are in [2025:RJ-JP:38678] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-11929/2025] custody since 05.09.2025 and trial/investigation of the case may take considerable time, therefore, the bail application of the accused-petitioners may be allowed. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application and contended that the petitioners along with the other co-accused after a petty incident threatened the complainant and thereafter, attacked him using fire arm. The recovery of empty cartridge was effected from the other co- accused Hemraj and allegation of causing injury to injured Sahajram with a lathi is against the other co-accused Mukhram. It is also contended that the petitioners are a habitual offenders and against them, 2 criminal cases were registered under various provisions. The matter is still under investigation, therefore, the bail application of the accused-petitioners may be dismissed. 4. Heard and perused the material available on record. 5. The material witnesses Hansram, Sahajram and Ajeet Singh, in their statement under Section 180 of BNSS have alleged that co-accused Narpat Gurjar and Mahendra used fire arm and name of the petitioner Hemraj is not mentioned in the FIR, therefore, considering the above facts, I deem it just and proper to enlarge the accused-petitioners on bail. 6. Accordingly, the bail application under Section 483 BNSS is allowed and it is ordered that the accused-petitioners namely: 1. Mukhram S/o Roopsingh and 2. Hemraj @ Shunt S/o Hariram, in connection with FIR No.235/2025 registered at Police Station Mandawar (Dausa), District Dausa, shall be enlarged on bail provided both of them furnish a personal bond in the sum of [2025:RJ-JP:38678] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-11929/2025] Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for their appearance before the court concerned on all the dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so. 7. The accused-petitioners are also directed to mark their presence on 25th of every month till conclusion of trial before the concerned police station. The SHO of the concerned police station is directed to maintain a regular register marking the presence of the accused-petitioners and shall send the presence report of the accused-petitioners on the same day to the concerned Trial Court without any delay. In case of any breach to the above condition, the learned Public Prosecutor shall be free to move the application against the petitioners for cancellation of the bail before the concerned Court. (PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J Keshav/147