[2025:RJ-JP:47668] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 14790/2025 Akash @ Akki @ Akya S/o Mahendra, Aged About 21 Years, R/o Brij Vihar Colony, Ali Ji Jav, Ward No. 15, Gandhi Nagar, Kishangarh P.s. Gandhinagar, District Ajmer. (At Present Confined In Central Jail, Ajmer). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent Connected With S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 15193/2025 Vishal @ Tomi S/o Pratap, Aged About 20 Years, R/o Shiv Mandir Ki Gali, Near Padga House, Ganda Nala, Maliyo Ki Dhani, Ward No. 10, Gandhi Nagar, District Ajmer (Raj.) (At Present In Central Jail, Ajmer). ----Petitioner Versus The State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Devanshu Sharma Mr. Avinash Vyas For State For Complainant : : Ms. Arti Sharma, PP Mr. Rhishi Raj Singh Rathore, PP Mr. Deepesh Kumawat HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN Judgment 25/11/2025 1. The instant bail applications have been filed under Section 483 BNSS on behalf of accused-applicants. The accused- applicants were arrested in connection with FIR No. 91/2025 registered at Police Station Gandhinagar District Ajmer for the offence(s) under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 3(5), 109(1) BNS. 2. Learned counsel for the accused-applicants submits that the applicants are young boys aged 20-21 years. It is fairly [2025:RJ-JP:47668] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-14790/2025] conceded that there are criminal antecedents registered against the applicants. It is submitted that applicants are in custody ever since 23.10.2025 and 24.10.2025 respectively. Learned counsel has submitted that compromise has been entered inter se the parties. 3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail applications. 4. Victim in question along with his mother and relative of accused-applicants have marked their presence before the Court, sans any directions by the Court. 5. Upon a conversation with the Court, it prima facie appears that victim in question and his mother are tutored and are under duress. Upon perusal of the case diary, it is noted that after date of incidence, victim was in Neurology Ward as he sustained life threatening injuries and there were multiple injuries on his body. Victim in question has also stated that he was admitted in the hospital for a period of 10-15 days. Nonetheless, the Investigating Officer concerned had also noted in the case diary that victim was not in a state of giving statement. 6. Considering the arguments advanced by the counsel for the parties, considering that heinous offence has been committed by accused-applicants; that injuries sustained to the victim are life threatening; and that the nature of injuries and offence do not fall under the permissible ambit of the ratio encapsulated in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and Ors.: 2012 (10) SCC 303, whereby the Court can draw a prima facie view qua compounding of offence or mitigating factors qua consideration of a bail application, and looking to the overall facts and circumstances of [2025:RJ-JP:47668] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-14790/2025] the case and material on record but without commenting on merits/demerits of the case, this court is not inclined to allow the bail applications of the accused-applicants. 7. Accordingly, the bail applications under Section 483 BNSS are dismissed at this stage. 8. A copy of present order be placed in the connected application. (SAMEER JAIN),J Pooja /158-159