HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 628/2025 1. Bholu S/o Udaysingh, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Badi Road, Sepau, P.s. Sepau, Distt. Dholpur (Raj.). (Accused Presently Confined At District Jail Dholpur). 2. Prashant Singh S/o Bhoora Singh, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Rajora Khurd P.s. Sepau, Distt. Dholpur, (Raj.) (Accused Presently Confined At District Jail Dholpur). ----Petitioners Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pallav Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Sharma, for complainant HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 29/01/2025 1. This instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS, on behalf of the petitioners, who have been arrested in connection with FIR No.374/2024 registered at Police Station Kolari, District Dholpur Rajasthan for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 125, 324(4), 303(2), 351(2), 352 & 3(5) BNS. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that the accused-petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that FIR was lodged against unknown person and complainant has submitted an affidavit that petitioners were not involved in the commission of (2 of 3) [CRLMB-628/2025] crime. Counsel further submits that petitioners are in custody since 03.01.2025. There are no criminal antecedents of the petitioners and trial of the case will take considerable time. Learned counsel further contend that further custody of the petitioners would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioners. He submits that petitioners have been found involved in the commission of crime. 4. Learned counsel appearing for complainant does not dispute the fact that petitioners were not involved in the commission of crime and there is no similarity in the physical appearance of petitioners with the suspects (assailants). 5. I have considered the contentions. 6. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioners, so also considering the affidavit of the complainant; absence of criminal antecedents and trial will take time in its conclusion 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 this bail application. 7. This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioners Bholu S/o Udaysingh & Prashant Singh S/o Bhoora Singh shall be released on bail provided, each of them 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 (3 of 3) [CRLMB-628/2025] they 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. 8. The observation 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. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN), J ANAND TANWAR /190