[2025:RJ-JP:6541] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 15765/2024 Premsingh @ Lala S/o Lakhanlal, Aged About 22 Years, R/o Meena Seemla, Police Station Mehandipur Balaji District Dausa, Rajasthan. (At Present Confined In Sub Jail Bandikui District Dausa). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Anoop Kumar Mr. Manvendra Singh For Respondent(s) For Complainant(s) : : Ms. Arti Sharma, PP Mr. Gaurav Meena HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 14/02/2025 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.198/2024 registered at Police Station Mehandipur Balaji, District Dausa (Rajasthan) for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 126(2) & 303(2) of BNS. Later on, police filed charge-sheet in this matter for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 118(1), 118(2) & 352 of BNS. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submit that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel submit that alleged offences are triable by Magistrate. Counsel submits that offence under Section 118(2) of BNSS (Section 326 of IPC) has been [2025:RJ-JP:6541] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-15765/2024] added for the reason that at the time of medical examination, there is injury(cut) on left ear pinna of the injured and teeth marks were present on remaining part of the ear. Counsel further submits that there are no criminal antecedents of the petitioner of similar nature. Petitioner is in custody since 03.12.2024 and trial will take considerable time. Further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor assisted by learned counsel for the complainant vehemently opposes the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner. Counsel for the complainant submits that there is total amputation of ear of the victim. 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 alleged offences are triable by Magistrate; charge-sheet has been filed in this matter; absence of criminal antecedents of the petitioner; period of custody, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it fit and proper to allow these bail applications. 6. The bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner Premsingh @ Lala S/o Lakhanlal 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 stipulation that he shall appear before that Court and any court to which the matter is transferred, on all subsequent dates of hearing [2025:RJ-JP:6541] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-15765/2024] and as and when called upon to do so. 7. It is made clear that the accused-petitioner shall not involve in any other offence(s) during currency of the bail and he shall mark his presence in first week of every month in the concerned police station. 8. 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 him by this Court. 9. Concerned SHO is directed to maintain a register recording the attendance of the petitioner. In case the petitioner fails to mark his presence in the concerned police station, the concerned SHO is directed to immediately report the matter to the concerned Court in this regard. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J LALIT MOHAN /367