[2025:RJ-JP:39649] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 12311/2025 Harsh Shrivastava @ Ranu Pandit S/o Ratan Shrivastava, Aged About 21 Years, R/o Mehandi-Baag, Hanuman Mandir Ke Peeche, Alwar, P.s. Kotwali, District Alwar (Raj.) (Presently Confined In Central Jail, Alwar). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Anupam Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP with Mr. Gaurav Gupta, Asst. G.A. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 25/09/2025 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.193/2025 registered at Police Station Thanagazi, District Alwar (Rajasthan) for offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 126(2) & 307 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, (in short ‘BNS’) 2023. After completion of investigation, police filed charge-sheet in this matter for offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 310(2) & 112(2) of BNS, 2023. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel submits that it has been alleged in the FIR in very specific terms that only four persons were involved in the act of Loot while police has filed charge-sheet in this matter against three persons and [2025:RJ-JP:39649] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-12311/2025] investigation has been kept pending against two persons. Counsel submits that no test identification parade has been conducted in this matter and mere recovery of one steel tiffin box at the instance of the petitioner is not enough to connect the petitioner with the alleged crime. It is submitted that trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. Counsel submits that petitioner is in custody since 13.06.2025 and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner and submits that petitioner is a habitual offender as 13 other cases have been registered against him. 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 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 period of custody, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it fit and proper to allow this bail application. 6. This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner- Harsh Shrivastava @ Ranu Pandit S/o Ratan Shrivastava, 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 [2025:RJ-JP:39649] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-12311/2025] 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 and third 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. In case the petitioner fails to mark his presence in the concerned police station, 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 /52