[2025:RJ-JP:50097] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Misc. 2nd Bail Application No. 15102/2025 Brajesh Meena S/o Jagdish Meena, Aged About 24 Years, R/o Kakadkya, Dhani Tan Silibavadi, Police Station Pratapgarh, District Alwar (Raj.) (Accused In Central Jail Alwar). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Anutosh Mishra For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 10/12/2025 1. This 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.41/2025 registered at Police Station Pratapgarh, District Alwar for offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 303(2) and 189(4) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (in short, ‘BNS’), 2023. After completion of investigation, police filed charge-sheet in this matter for offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 118(2), 109(1) & 3(5) of BNS, 2023. 2. The first bail application filed on behalf of the petitioner was dismissed as withdrawn by this Court vide order dated 11.09.2025 while giving liberty to renew the prayer for bail after submission of result of investigation. Now, charge-sheet has been filed thus, this second bail application has been preferred. [2025:RJ-JP:50097] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-15102/2025] 3. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. It is submitted that cross-cases have been registered between the parties. It is contended that alleged incident took place in spur of the moment and the petitioner had no intention of causing any life threatening injury on the person of the injured. It is contended that as per medical report, said injury has been opined as may be endangered to life. It is contended that there are no criminal antecedents against the petitioner and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. Counsel submits that petitioner is in custody since his date of arrest and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 4. Learned State counsel opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner. 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, especially considering the fact that cross-cases have been registered between the parties, as also the fact that charge-sheet has been filed, so also the fact that there are no criminal antecedents against the petitioner and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it proper to allow the second bail application. 7. This second bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner - Brajesh Meena S/o Jagdish Meena, shall be released on bail provided, he shall furnish a [2025:RJ-JP:50097] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-15102/2025] personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty 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. The observations made hereinabove are only for decision of the bail application and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J CHARU SONI /9