[2025:RJ-JP:4589] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 15030/2024 Arvind Choudhary S/o Late Shri Indrapal, Aged About 19 Years, R/o Kirawali, Abuapura, Police Station Mandi Agra, U.p. Presently Bhupendra Cepus, Jhareda Road, Hindon City, Police Station Kotwali, Hindon City, District Karaoli, Presently Tenant Gate No. 01 Ke Samne, Muhana Mandi, Police Station Muhana, Jaipur East. (At Present Confined In Jail, Jaipur). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent Connected With S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 16039/2024 Suryapratap Singh @ Sonu Rajput S/o Shri Mansingh, Aged About 22 Years, R/o Prthvipura Baleta Police Station Malakhera, Dist. Alwar, At Present At Sector- 26, Pratap Nagar, Jaipur, At Present Tenant At 125, Gurunanak Colony, Rajapark, Police Station Adarsh Nagar, Jaipur. (At Present Confined In Central Jail, Jaipur). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 16109/2024 Balkrishan Sharma @ Golu S/o Shri Sanjay Kumar Sharma, Aged About 23 Years, R/o Baswara Pada Matiya Mahal, Hindaun City, Police Station Kotwali, Hindaun City, District Karauli. At Present H-1/1/122, Utsav Apartment, Sector 28, Pratap Nagar, Jaipur (East). (Presently Confined In J/c Jaipur, Raj.) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sukhdev Singh Solanki Mr. Sunil Kumar Jain Mr. Pushpendra Sharma For Respondent(s) : Ms. Arti Sharma, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order [2025:RJ-JP:4589] (2 of 4) [CRLMB-15030/2024] 03/02/2025 1. These bail applications have been filed under Section 483 of BNSS on behalf of the petitioners, who have been arrested in connection with FIR No.368/2024 registered at Police Station Sanganer, District Jaipur City(East) (Rajasthan) for the offence punishable under Section 309(4) of BNS. Later on, police filed charge-sheet in this matter for the offence punishable under Section 309(4) of BNS. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel submit that alleged offence is triable by Magistrate. Counsel submit that neither identification parade was conducted nor any recovery has been made from the petitioner. Petitioners Arvind Choudhary and Suryapratap Singh @ Sonu Rajput are in custody since 06.11.2024 and petitioner Balkrishan Sharma @ Golu is in custody since 05.11.2024 and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. Further custody of the petitioners would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner Suryapratap Singh @ Sonu Rajput submits that it appears that bail application of petitioner Suryapratap Singh @ Sonu Rajput filed before the learned trial Court was decided on merits and same was dismissed on the ground of absence of his counsel. It was not appropriate for the learned trial Court to reject the bail application in absence of hihs counsel rather, an opportunity should have been provided to the petitioner to seek legal aid from Legal Services Authority. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by [2025:RJ-JP:4589] (3 of 4) [CRLMB-15030/2024] counsel for the petitioners. 5. I have considered the contentions. 6. It is apparent that bail application of petitioner Suryapratap Singh @ Sonu Rajput was not decided on merits and same was dismissed on account of absence of his counsel. In my considered opinion, it was not appropriate course of learned trial Court to dismiss a bail application of an accused solely on the ground of absence of his counsel. Further, at this stage, remanding the matter to the learned trial court for deciding the bail application of petitioner Suryapratap Singh @ Sonu Rajput on merits would not serve any fruitful purpose rather, it will cause delay in disposing of the bail application. This Court has power to grant bail under Section 483 of BNSS (Section 439 of Cr.PC), concurrent to the court of sessions and an accused can approach this Court directly in exceptional circumstances. 7. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioners, as also considering the fact that alleged offence is triable by Magistrate; trial will take time and looking to the custody period of the petitioners but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it fit and proper to allow these bail applications. 8. These bail applications are accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioners (1) Arvind Choudhary S/o Late Shri Indrapal, (2) Suryapratap Singh @ Sonu Rajput S/o Shri Mansingh & (3) Balkrishan Sharma @ Golu S/o Shri Sanjay Kumar Sharma shall be released on bail provided [2025:RJ-JP:4589] (4 of 4) [CRLMB-15030/2024] 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 each of them 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. 9. It is made clear that the accused-petitioners shall not involve in any other offence(s) during currency of the bail and they shall mark their presence in first week of every month in the concerned police station. 10. Concerned SHO is directed to maintain a register recording the attendance of the petitioners. In case the petitioners fail to mark their presence in the concerned police station, the concerned SHO is directed to immediately report the matter to the concerned Court in this regard. 11. 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 them by this Court. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J LALIT MOHAN /126-128