[2025:RJ-JP:310] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 15460/2024 Jagmal Singh S/o Shri Prahlad, R/o Chandpur, Thana Mundawar, District Khairthal-Tijara. (At Present Sub Jail, Kishangarhbass). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Abhimanyu Singh Yaduvanshi For Respondent(s) : Mr. Devi Singh, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 03/01/2025 1. The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.550/2024 registered at Police Station Mundawar, District Khairtal-Tijara (Raj.) for the offences punishable under Sections 109(1), 331(8) & 303(2) of BNS. During investigation, offences punishable under Sections 109(1) & 331(8) of BNS have been found proved against the petitioner. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel submits that alleged incident took place on the intervening night of 30.10.2024 & 31.10.2024. Counsel submits that on 31.10.2024, an application was submitted by the complainant before the Police Station Mundawar, District Khairtal-Tijara but in the said application, different story was narrated by the complainant. Counsel submits that on the basis of this complaint, petitioner was taken into [2025:RJ-JP:310] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-15460/2024] custody under Section 151 Cr.PC (Section 170 of BNSS) and he was allowed on bail and thereafter, present FIR was lodged on dated 03.11.2024 by concocting the false story. Counsel submits that no such occurrence took place as alleged by the complainant and it is also evident from the medical expert that superficial burn was found on the person of the injured. Counsel submits that charge-sheet has been filed in this matter. Petitioner is in custody since 04.11.2024 and trial of the case will take considerable time. Further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner. 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 parties as also the fact that at two different time, two different stories were narrated by the complainant with regard to the same incident; charge-sheet has been filed in this matter; looking to the custody period, 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 Jagmal Singh S/o Shri Prahlad 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 [2025:RJ-JP:310] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-15460/2024] stipulation that he 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. 7. 7. 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 LALIT MOHAN /278