[2025:RJ-JP:39501] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 12235/2025 Manish Singh S/o Prahlad Singh, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Near Meena Ki Chakki, Rajaredi, Police Station Madanganj, District Ajmer (Raj.) (At Present In Central Jail, Ajmer). ----Petitioner Versus The State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Shyam Bihari Gautam 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. This bail application has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS, on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.154/2024 registered at Police Station Madanganj, District Ajmer for offences punishable under Sections 147, 323, 504, 143, 307 and 452 of IPC. After completion of investigation, police filed charge-sheet in this matter for offences punishable under Sections 323, 504, 307, 452, 148, 149 and 325 of IPC. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel submits that though, injury sustained to injured has been attributed to the petitioner and same has been opined as dangerous to life but petitioner is in custody since 08.05.2024 and as such, he has suffered incarceration of more than 16 months. It is submitted [2025:RJ-JP:39501] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-12235/2025] that other co-accused persons have already been granted benefit of bail by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court. Learned counsel contends that injured has arrived at compromise with other co- accused persons. It is contended that there is one criminal antecedent against the petitioner for offences punishable under Sections 143, 148, 149, 323, 451, 379, 354 & 341 of IPC and Sections 3(10)(11) of SC/ST Act. It is contended that trial will take considerable time in its conclusion and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposes the prayer for bail made by learned counsel for the petitioner. 4. Heard. Perused the material available on record. 5. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances; considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner, especially considering the fact that other co-accused persons have already been granted benefit of bail by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, so also considering the fact that petitioner has suffered incarceration of more than 16 months and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion, but without expressing any opinion on merits/demerits of this case, I deem it proper to allow the bail application. 6. This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner - Manish Singh S/o Prahlad Singh, 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 [2025:RJ-JP:39501] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-12235/2025] 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. 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, till trial is concluded. 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 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 bail application and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J CHARU SONI /246