[2025:RJ-JP:4003] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Second Bail Application No. 837/2025 Yogesh S/o Samay Singh, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Gurira, Police Station Jurhera District Deeg. (At Present In Sub Jail, Deeg). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Asgar Khan For Respondent(s) For Complainant(s) : : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP Mr. Liyakat Khan HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 24/01/2025 1. The instant second bail application has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.85/2023 registered at Police Station Jurhara, District Bharatpur (Rajasthan) for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 323, 341, 354 & 452 of IPC. Later on, police filed charge-sheet in this matter for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 341, 325, 326, 307, 504 & 34 of IPC. 2. First bail application of the petitioner was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to renew the prayer of bail after submission of result of investigation. Now, charge-sheet has been filed. Thus this second bail application has been preferred by the petitioner. [2025:RJ-JP:4003] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-837/2025] 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel submits that although there is allegation against the petitioner in the FIR that he caused injury on the head of the injured Mukesh and Sunita by sharp object but according to the statement of the injured Mukesh, said injury was not caused by the petitioner rather than it was attributed to other co-accused. Counsel submits that injury on the head of Sunita has been found simple in nature. Counsel submits that cross-cases have been registered between the parties. During the investigation of cross-FIR lodged against the complainant herein, offence under Section 326 of IPC has been found proved against him. Petitioner is in custody since 08.10.2024 and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. Further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 4. 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 the injuries sustained to the accused-petitioner’s side are simple in nature. 5. I have considered the contentions. 6. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner and especially the fact that cross-cases have been registered between the parties in which offence under Section 326 of IPC has been found proved against the complainant herein; charge-sheet has been filed in this matter and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion; period of custody, but without [2025:RJ-JP:4003] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-837/2025] commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it fit and proper to allow this bail application. 7. This second bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner Yogesh S/o Samay Singh 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. 8. Any 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 /45