[2025:RJ-JP:6710] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 16363/2024 Sitaram Son Of Kanaram, Resident Of Dhani Bandhawali, Tan Aaspura, Police Station Ajeetgarh, District Neemkathana, Rajasthan ( At Present Accused Petitioner Confined Sub Jail Neem Ka Thana) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vidhut Kumar Gupta For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP 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.359/2024 registered at Police Station Ajeetgarh, District Neem Ka Thana for the offence punishable under Section 232(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (in short ‘BNS’), 2023. Investigation is being conducted for the offences punishable under Sections 232(1) and 333 of BNS. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Learned counsel submits that on the basis of false allegation, impugned FIR has been lodged against the petitioner. It has been alleged in the FIR that petitioner threatened the complainant that he would not give evidence against him in FIR No. 152/2024 registered at Police [2025:RJ-JP:6710] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-16363/2024] Station Ajeetgarh, District Neem ka Thana for the offence punishable under Section 307 of IPC. Counsel submits that false allegation has been levelled against him. After completion of investigation, charge-sheet has been chalked out on 11.02.2025. Counsel argues that trial of the case will take considerable time in its conclusion. Petitioner is in custody since his date of arrest and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by the learned 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 petitioner; trial will take time in its conclusion as well as looking to the custody period, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it proper to allow the bail application. 6. This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner – Sitaram Son Of Kanaram 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. [2025:RJ-JP:6710] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-16363/2024] 7. However, it is made clear that the petitioner shall not involve in similar offence(s) during currency of bail granted by this Court. The petitioner is further directed to mark his presence in the concerned police station in first & third week of every month, till the statement of complainant is recorded during trial in FIR No. 152/2024 registered at Police Station Ajeetgarh, District Neem ka Thana. 8. Concerned SHO is directed to maintain a register recording the attendance of the petitioner, as directed above. In case the petitioner fails to mark his presence in the concerned police station, as directed above, the concerned SHO is directed to immediately report the matter to the concerned Court in this regard. 9. If breach of any 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 petitioner by this Court. 10. The observation made herein above 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 GAUTAM JAIN /389