[2025:RJ-JP:39830] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 12455/2025 1. Sunil Sain @ Bholashankar S/o Mahaveer, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Power House Colony Dei, Police Station Dei, District Bundi (Raj.) (Accused In Present Confined District Jail Bundi) 2. Mahaveer Sain S/o Brijmohan, Aged About 60 Years, R/o Power House Colony Dei, Police Station Dei, District Bundi (Raj.) (Accused In Present Confined District Jail Bundi) ----Petitioners Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajesh Kumar Sain For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP with Mr. Gaurav Gupta, Assistant GA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 26/09/2025 1. This bail application has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS, on behalf of the petitioners, who have been arrested in connection with FIR No.148/2025 registered at Police Station Dei, District Bundi for offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 126(2) and 3(5) of BNS, 2023. Investigation is being conducted in this matter for offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 109(1), 118(1), 118(2) and 3(5) of BNS, 2023. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that the accused-petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. Learned counsel submits that allegation of causing life threatening injuries on the person of the injured has been levelled against co- [2025:RJ-JP:39830] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-12455/2025] accused person namely- Bunty. It is submitted that omnibus allegations have been levelled against the petitioners. It is contended that there are no criminal antecedents against the petitioners and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. Counsel submits that petitioners are in custody since their date of arrest and 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 petitioners are duly named in the FIR and they have actively participated in commission of crime. 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 both the parties, especially considering the material available before me in the form of case diary including testimony of injured- Shiva Sain who received life threatening injury wherein it has been stated by him that life threatening injury was caused by co-accused- Bunty and trial will take considerable 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-petitioners – 1) Sunil Sain @ Bholashankar S/o Mahaveer and 2) Mahaveer Sain S/o Brijmohan 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 [2025:RJ-JP:39830] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-12455/2025] 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. 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. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the concerned SHO for necessary compliance. 11. 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 GAUTAM JAIN /286