[2025:RJ-JP:8807] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 14502/2024 Ankit S/o Shri Amrit Lal Verma, Aged About 41 Years, R/o Gulab Badi, Ajmer. ----Accused-Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajendra Gautam, Adv., with Mr. Saurabh Chatterjee, Adv., for Mr. Sunil Kumar Singh, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Ms. Arti Sharma, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 27/02/2025 1. The instant pre-arrest bail application has been filed under Section 482 BNSS, 2023 on behalf of the petitioner, who is having apprehension of arrest in FIR No.380/2024 registered at Police Station Christian Ganj, District Ajmer for the offences punishable under Sections 281 and 109(1) of BNS, 2023. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Learned counsel submits that cross-cases have registered between the parties. He further submits that it is a simple case of road accident which has been given colour of serious criminal offence. He argues that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required in this matter. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by the counsel for the petitioner. She submits that there is an [2025:RJ-JP:8807] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-14502/2024] allegation against the petitioner that he caused injuries to the injured by driving his car at a high speed. She further submits that intention of the petitioner was very clear to cause life-threatening injuries to the injured. As per the injury report, one grievous injury was found on the person of one injured- Devendra, and two grievous injuries were found on the person of the other injured- Poonam. 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 the counsel for the parties as also looking to the nature of injuries sustained to the injured persons and nature of allegations levelled against the petitioner, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I do not find it a fit case to extend indulgence of pre-arrest bail to the accused petitioner. Accordingly, this anticipatory bail application is dismissed. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J MADAN/271