[2025:RJ-JP:2409] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 13341/2024 1. Prahlad S/o Shri Ramphool, Aged About 50 Years, R/o Mawasipura, Post Dardaturki, P.s. Baroni, Tehsil Peeplu, Distt. Tonk, Rajasthan. (At Present Accused Petitioner Confined District Jail Tonk). 2. Khushiram S/o Prahlad, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Mawasipura, Post Dardaturki, P.s. Baroni, Tehsil Peeplu, Distt. Tonk, Rajasthan. (At Present Accused Petitioner Confined District Jail Tonk). ----Petitioners Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vijendra Yadav For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP Mr. Akshay Yadav HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 17/01/2025 1. Counsel for the petitioners seeks permission to withdraw the instant bail application qua accused-petitioner No.2 namely Khushiram S/o Prahlad with liberty to renew the prayer of bail after recording testimony of injured & medical expert, who conducted medical examination of injured. 2. Permission sought for is granted. 3. Accordingly, this bail application stands dismissed as withdrawn qua accused-petitioner No.2 namely Khushiram S/o Prahlad with liberty as prayed for. [2025:RJ-JP:2409] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-13341/2024] 4. So far as the accused-petitioner No.1 namely Prahlad S/o Shri Ramphool is concerned, he has filed the instant bail application under Section 483 of BNSS. The petitioner is in custody in connection with FIR No.346/2024 registered at Police Station Baroni, District Tonk (Raj.) for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2) & 115(2) of BNS. Later on, police filed charge-sheet for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 109(1), 117(2) & 3(5) of BNS. 5. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Learned counsel submits that main allegation of causing injury has been levelled against Khushiram. Petitioner-prahlad is in custody since 07.10.2024. Charge-sheet has been filed & trial of the case will take considerable time. Further custody of the petitioners would not serve any fruitful purpose. 6. Learned Public Prosecutor assisted by learned counsel for complainant vehemently opposes the bail application. They submit that petitioner is named in FIR & he actively participated in commission of crime. 7. I have considered the contentions. 8. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner as also looking to the fact that main allegation of causing injury is against Khushiram; absence of criminal antecedents 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 the bail application qua Prahlad only. The [2025:RJ-JP:2409] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-13341/2024] observations made hereinabove is only for decision of the instant bail application and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner. 9. This bail application is accordingly partly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner – Prahlad S/o Shri Ramphool 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 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. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J GAUTAM JAIN /96