[2025:RJ-JP:6010] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No.15363/2024 1. Manoj Kumar S/o Shri Raghuveer Singh, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Beechkapura Chinayat, Police Station Suroth District Karauli (Rajasthan) (Presently Lodged In Sub Jail Hindaun City, District Karauli). 2. Praduman Singh @ Pappu S/o Shri Nankishore, Aged About 24 Years, R/o Usrani, Police Station Kumher, District Deeg (Rajasthan). (Presently Lodged In Sub Jail Hindaun City, District Karauli). ----Petitioners Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sudhir Jain, Adv. For Respondent(s) For Complainant : : Mr. Onkar Singh Rajpurohit, PP Mr. Anil Kumar Shukla, Adv. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR Order 11/02/2025 1. The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. on behalf of accused-petitioners. The accused- petitioners have been arrested in connection with FIR No.431/2024, registered at Police Station Suroth, District Karauli, for the offence(s) under Sections 329(3), 126(2), 115(2), 191(2), 191(3), 190, 109(1), 303(2) and 351(2) of B.N.S. and Section 3/25 of the Arms Act. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that the accused- petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. It is [2025:RJ-JP:6010] (2 of 4) [CRLMB-15363/2024] contended that the case under Section 109(1) of B.N.S. is not made out against the accused-petitioners. It is alleged in the 'parcha bayan' that the accused-petitioners caused firearm injuries to Ishwar Singh. In the injury report, the concerned medical jurist has reported two injuries caused to Ishwar Singh as simple blunt in nature. There is no specific opinion that the injuries caused to Ishwar Singh was resulted by use of firearm. It is also contended that the accused-petitioners also lodged the FIR against the complainant-party for assaulting them and the petitioner-Manoj Kumar and the other co-accused Raghuveer Singh sustained injuries. The other co-accused Raghuveer Singh has already been enlarged on bail by the trial Court itself, the injuries sustained to Ishwar Singh, Veda Devi and Chanda Devi are not dangerous to life and all the injuries shown to be simple blunt in nature except injury No.4 caused to Ishwar Singh at his arm. There is a land dispute between the accused-petitioners and the complainant- party. It is argued that independent eye-witnesses namely, Dharma Singh, Rampati and Ramswaroop in their statements rendered under Section 180 of B.N.S.S have stated that both the parties had altercation and caused injuries to each other. It is also mentioned by the witnesses that petitioner-Manoj Kumar did not cause any firearm injury to Ishwar Singh, rather he opened fire in air, further there was no intention on the part of petitioner-Manoj Kumar and other petitioner to cause death of the injured. There are no criminal antecedents against the accused-petitioners, the accused-petitioners are in custody since 13.11.2024 and trial of the case may take considerable time, therefore, the bail application of the accused-petitioners may be allowed. [2025:RJ-JP:6010] (3 of 4) [CRLMB-15363/2024] 3. Learned Public Prosecutor as well as learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant have vehemently opposed the grant of bail application. 4. Learned counsel for the complainant has contended that in the statement of injured Ishwar Singh, Vidhya and Chanda Devi, they have clearly stated that the accused-petitioner Manoj Kumar opened fire resulting into injury to Ishwar Singh. It is also contended that the accused-petitioners were aggressor and they caused multiple injuries to Ishwar Singh, Chanda Devi and Veda Devi. At the instance of the accused-petitioner Manoj Kumar, firearm was recovered, therefore, considering the multiple injuries sustained to injured Ishwar Singh and the other injured, the bail application of the accused-petitioners may be dismissed. 5. Heard and perused the material available on the record. 6. The injuries sustained to injured Ishwar Singh except injury No.4 were found to be simple blunt in nature and injury No.4 was found to be grievous in nature and sustained at arms. The injuries sustained to the other injured are simple blunt in nature and not on the vital part of the body. In the injury report, the concerned doctor has not reported that the injuries sustained to Ishwar Singh was caused with firearm. The independent eye-witnesses in their statements recorded under Section 180 of B.N.S.S. have stated that the accused-petitioner Manoj Kumar did not fire at Ishwar Singh rather he opened fire in the air. There is a land dispute between the petitioners parties and the complainant party, the other co-accused Raghuveer Singh and the petitioners also sustained injuries, therefore, considering the above facts and [2025:RJ-JP:6010] (4 of 4) [CRLMB-15363/2024] without expressing anything on the merits of the case, I deem it just and proper to enlarge the accused-petitioners on bail. 7. Accordingly, the bail application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. is allowed and it is ordered that the accused-petitioners- 1. Manoj Kumar S/o Shri Raghuveer Singh and 2. Praduman Singh @ Pappu S/o Shri Nankishore, in connection with FIR No.431/2024, registered at Police Station Suroth, District Karauli, shall be enlarged on bail provided both of them furnish a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for their appearance before the Court concerned on all the dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so. (PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J Ashwani Kr Srivastava /-103