HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 2nd Bail Application No. 16014/2024 Dinesh @ Rohitash Bawariya S/o Choturam, Aged About 23 Years, R/o Dhani Sala Wali Tan Ganeshwar, P.s. Sadar Neemkathana, District Neemkathana, Raj. At Present In Central Jail Neemkathana. ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Manish Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 03/01/2025 1. Petitioner has filed this second bail application under Section 483 of BNSS. 2. F.I.R. No. 361/2024 was registered against the petitioner at Police Station Ajeetgarh, District Neemkathana for the offence punishable under Section 303(2) of BNS. 3. First bail application of the petitioner was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to renew the prayer of bail application after filing result of investigation. Now, charge-sheet has been filed. Thus, this second bail application has been preferred. 4. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Petitioner is in custody since 09.11.2024. Counsel further submits that alleged offence is triable by magistrate. He further submits (2 of 3) [CRLMB-16014/2024] that maximum punishment for alleged offence is 3 years. Charge- sheet has been filed and trial will take considerable time. Further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 5. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner. He further submits that petitioner is a habitual offender as 35 other cases have been registered against him at this stage. Thus, bail should not be granted. 6. Counsel for the petitioner submits that out of 35 cases registered against the petitioner, in 20 cases he has been acquitted by the trial court. 7. I have considered the contentions. 8. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, especially the fact that alleged offence is triable by magistrate; charge-sheet has been filed; as well as considering the period of custody, but without commenting anything on merits and demerits of the case, I deem it proper to allow the bail application. 9. This second bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner- Dinesh @ Rohitash Bawariya S/o Choturam 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 and as and when called upon to do so. 10. The observation made hereinabove is only for decision of the (3 of 3) [CRLMB-16014/2024] instant bail application and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner. 11. It is made clear that the accused petitioner shall not involve in any other similar offence during currency of the bail and he shall mark his presence on first week of every month in the concerned police station. 12. 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. 13. The SHO concerned is directed to maintain a register recording attendance of the accused, as mentioned above. In case, the petitioner fails to mark his attendance as mentioned above, the SHO shall intimate the trial court immediately. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J ANANDTANWAR/67