[2025:RJ-JP:6459] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 14834/2024 Satish Kumar S/o Babulal, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Ronijathan, Police Station Kherli, District Alwar (Raj.). (Accused Petitioner Confined At District Jail Alwar). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent Connected With S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 15223/2024 Dineshchand @ Rinku S/o Ramkishor, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Buchpuri, Police Station Rajgarh, District Alwar (Raj.) (At Present Confined At Central Jail Alwar). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 1121/2025 Mahendra Kumar S/o Chetram Meena, Aged About 22 Years, R/o Teela Ka Bas, Bhanokhar, Police Station Bahatukalan, District Alwar (Raj.). (Presently Confined In Central Jail Alwar). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. K.S. Rawat Mr. Yeswant Singh Mr. Aatish Jain For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 13/02/2025 1. These instant bail applications have been filed under Section 483 of BNSS., on behalf of the petitioners, who have been arrested in connection with FIR No.624/2024 registered at Police [2025:RJ-JP:6459] (2 of 4) [CRLMB-14834/2024] Station Rajgarh (Alwar), District Alwar (Raj.) for the offences punishable under Section 309(6) of BNS & Section 27 of Arms Act. After completion of investigation, police filed charge-sheet in this matter for the offences punishable under Sections 109(1), 310(2), 111(2)(b), 111(3), 111(5), 61(2)(a), 118(2) of BNS, Sections 25(6), 3/25, 5/25 & 27 of Arms Act. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that the accused-petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. Learned counsel submit that no initial evidence was available with the Investigation Officer to make arrest of the petitioners & they were arrested only on the basis of the fact that two hours prior of the alleged incident, call location of the petitioners was found near the place of incident. He submits that as per FIR, one tiffin and some oranges were looted by the petitioners. Petitioners are in custody since their date of arrest & there are no criminal antecedents of similar nature against them. Charge-sheet has been filed & trial of the case will take considerable time. Further custody of the petitioners would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioners. He submits that not only mobile location of the petitioners has been found near the place of incident but also country-made pistols have been recovered from them. 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 petitioners as also the fact that charge-sheet has [2025:RJ-JP:6459] (3 of 4) [CRLMB-14834/2024] been filed & trial will take time in its conclusion; absence of criminal antecedents of similar nature 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 these bail applications. 6. These bail applications are accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioners – 1) Satish Kumar S/o Babulal, 2) Dineshchand @ Rinku S/o Ramkishor & 3) Mahendra Kumar S/o Chetram Meena shall be released on bail provided each of them 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 they 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. 7. It is made clear that the accused-petitioners shall not involve in any other offence(s) during currency of the bail and they shall mark their presence in first week of every month in the concerned police station. 8. Concerned SHO is directed to maintain a register recording the attendance of the petitioners, as directed above. In case the petitioners fail to mark their 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. [2025:RJ-JP:6459] (4 of 4) [CRLMB-14834/2024] 9. 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 them by this Court. 10. The observation made hereinabove is only for decision of these instant bail applications and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J GAUTAM JAIN /111-113