[2025:RJ-JP:39372] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 12207/2025 Tejpal Singh Alias Teja S/o Bhagwan Singh, R/o Basai Ghiyaram, Police Station Rajakhera, Dholpur, Rajasthan, (At Present Confined In Central Jail, Dholpur) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor ----Respondent Connected With S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 12208/2025 Shivraj Singh S/o Mohan Singh, R/o Village Kalwar Road, Hathoj, Police Station Kardhani, District Jaipur At Present Lodged In The District Jail, Dholpur. ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rinesh Gupta Mr. Ashvin Garg with Mr. Gajendra Singh Chauhan and Mr. Nonit Hatila For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP with Mr. Gaurav Gupta, Asst. G.A. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 24/09/2025 1. These bail applications have been filed under Section 483 of BNSS on behalf of the petitioners, who have been arrested in connection with FIR No.185/2025 registered at Police Station Raja Khera, District Dholpur for offences under Sections 111(2)(b), 111(3), 111(4) & 61(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (in short, [2025:RJ-JP:39372] (2 of 4) [CRLMB-12207/2025] ‘BNS’), 2023 and Sections 3/25(6) & 7 of Arms Act. After completion of investigation, police filed charge-sheet in this matter for offences punishable under Sections 111(2)(b), 111(3), 111(4) & 61(2) of BNS, 2023 and Sections 3/25(6), 7, 8, 25(1)(a), 3(1), 25(1-B)(a), 25(1-A), 25(1-AA), 25(8) & 35 of Arms Act. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that the accused-petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. Arguing the case of petitioner- Tejpal, counsel submits that no case under Section 111(2) of BNS, 2023 is made out from the facts mentioned in the FIR. It is submitted that main accused of this case is Jitendra @ Jeetu who is son of petitioner- Tejpal. It is contended that in order to implicate the petitioner, false recovery of 10 live cartridges has been shown from his possession. It is contended that petitioner is 67 years old and only one other case has been registered against him in the year 2007. It is submitted that petitioner is in custody since 04.06.2025 and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Arguing the case of petitioner- Shivraj, counsel submits that no arm has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner and he has been made accused in this case solely on the basis of information furnished by co-accused- Jitendra @ Jeetu. It is submitted that there are no criminal antecedents against the petitioner and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. Counsel submits that petitioner is in custody since 05.06.2025 and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners. [2025:RJ-JP:39372] (3 of 4) [CRLMB-12207/2025] 5. I have considered the contentions. 6. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the argument advanced by learned counsel for the petitioners, especially considering the material available on record in the form of charge-sheet 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 these bail applications. 7. These bail applications are accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioners (1) Tejpal Singh Alias Teja S/ o Bhagwan Singh, and (2) Shivraj Singh S/o Mohan Singh, shall be released on bail provided each of them 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 they 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. 8. 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. 9. 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 [2025:RJ-JP:39372] (4 of 4) [CRLMB-12207/2025] immediately report the matter to the concerned Court in this regard. 10. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the concerned SHO for necessary compliance. 11. 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. 12. The observations made hereinabove are only for decision of these bail applications and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J CHARU SONI /235-236