[2025:RJ-JP:1950] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 13764/2024 Mrinal Kapoor S/o Mukesh Kumar, R/o Flat No. 2C, Navya Apartment, Ganesh Nagar, 200 Feet Byepass, Police Station Karni Vihar, Jaipur. (Presently Confined At Central Jail, Jaipur). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Deepak Chauhan For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 13/01/2025 1. The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 BNSS on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.1097/2024 registered at Police Station Kardhani, District Jaipur (West) (Raj.) for the offences punishable under Sections 111(3), 103(1) & 55 of BNS and Sections 3 & 25(6) of Arms Act. After completion of investigation, charge sheet has been filed in the court concerned. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel submits that petitioner has been made accused solely on the basis of police interrogation of the co-accused person. Counsel submits that after making the arrest of the petitioner, false recovery of three live cartridges have been shown at the instance of petitioner from premises of accused Chetan Sharma. Counsel submits that it is [2025:RJ-JP:1950] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-13764/2024] also evident that petitioner was not in contact of any hardcore criminal. Counsel submits that charge for offence under Section 103 (1) of BNS (Section 302 IPC) has been added with the aid of Section 55 of BNS (115 of IPC). Counsel further submits there are no criminal antecedents of the petitioner. Petitioner is in custody since 10.10.2024 and trial will take considerable time. Further custody of the petitioners would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner but failed to controvert the argument of the counsel for the petitioner that petitioner was not in contact of any hardcore criminal. 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, as also the fact that investigation has been completed; charge-sheet has been filed in this matter; he is in custody since 10.10.2024 and trial will take time in its conclusion 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 Mrinal Kapoor S/o Mukesh Kumar 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 [2025:RJ-JP:1950] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-13764/2024] and as and when called upon to do so. 7. 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 attendance of the petitioner, as directed above. 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. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J LALIT MOHAN /263