HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 12126/2025 Rajat Singh @ Chetan S/o Satish Singh, Aged About 20 Years, R/o Ward No. 07, Buhana, Police Station Buhana, District Jhunjhunu (Raj.) (At Present In Sub Jail, Khetri). ----Petitioner Versus The State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent Connected With S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 12673/2025 Surendra Singh S/o Satidan Singh, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Ward No. 21, Gogaji Ka Rasta, Kasba Buhana, P.s. Buhana, District Jhunjhunu (Raj.) (At Present Confined In District Jail Jhunjhunu). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr.Rajesh Kumar Sharma with Ms.Kamini Pareek Mr.Jitendra Choudhary & Mr.Sarthak Chobey Mr.Vijay Punia with Mr.Sanjeev Kumar For Respondent(s) : Mr.Amit Punia, Addl.GA-cum-PP Mr.Navdeep Singh Ms.Bhuvaneshwari JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 14/10/2025 1. Both these bail applications under Section 483, Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, “BNSS”) have been filed by the petitioners in connection with FIR No.142/2025, (2 of 4) [CRLMB-12126/2025] registered at Police Station Buhana, District Jhunjhunu (Raj) wherein they have been charged for the offences punishable under Sections 189(2), 115(2), 126(2) & 109(1) of BNS and subsequently, they have been charged for the offence punishable under Sections 189(2), 115(2), 126(2), 109(1) & 61(2) of BNS. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that common general allegations have been levelled against both the petitioners and the allegation of committing the specific overt-act of causing head injury on the head of the injured Shardul Singh has been levelled against the co-accused Sangram Singh. Counsel submits that the petitioners is in custody since the date of their arrest and after investigation, charge-sheet has been filed and trial will take its own time to conclude, therefore indulgence of bail be granted to the petitioners. 3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor as well as the counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant opposed the arguments raised by counsel for the petitioners and submit that the petitioner-Surendra Singh is a habitual offender against whom 12 criminal cases have been registered hence, under these circumstances, the petitioners are not entitled to get indulgence of bail. 4. In rejoinder, counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner-Surendra Singh submits that out of above 12 criminal cases, the petitioner-Surendra Singh has been acquitted in 6 criminal cases and his presence has not even been shown by the injured in his statement recorded during the course of investigation. (3 of 4) [CRLMB-12126/2025] 5. Heard and considered the submissions made at the Bar and perused the material available on record. 6. Considering the arguments put forward by the learned counsel for the petitioners and looking to the fact that common general allegations have been levelled against them and no specific overt-act has been assigned to them and even the petitioner- Surendra Singh is not named in the statement of the injured. It is also to be noted that a specific overt-act has been assigned against the co-accused Sangram Singh alleging that he caused fatal blow on the head of injured and the same was found to be dangerous to life. 7. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the time period of custody spent by the petitioners and submission of charge-sheet after completion of investigation and without expressing any opinion on merits and demerits of the case, this Court deems it just and appropriate to grant indulgence of bail to the petitioners under Section 483 BNSS. 8. Accordingly, both the bail applications under Section Section 483 BNSS are allowed and it is ordered that accused- petitioners Rajat Singh @ Chetan S/o Satish Singh & Surendra Singh S/o Satidan Singh arrested in connection with aforementioned FIR, may be released on bail; provided each of them furnishes a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two surety bonds of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of learned trial Court with the stipulation to appear before that Court on all dates of hearing, and as and when called upon to do so. (4 of 4) [CRLMB-12126/2025] 9. In case, the petitioners are found involved in committing and repeating the same offence again in future, the Public Prosecutor/State would be at liberty to move an application for cancellation of their bail before the Jurisdictional Court. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Aayush Sharma /116-117