[2025:RJ-JP:49043] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal 2nd Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 14758/2025 Love Mehra S/o Bhojraj, Aged About 19 Years, R/o House No. 2- D-47 Sanjay Nagar Police Thana Vigyan Nagar Kota Rajasthan. (At Present Confined At Central Jail Kota). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Abdul Rahim Khan For Respondent(s) : Mr. Manvendra Singh Choudhary, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN Order 02/12/2025 1. The second bail application under Section 483 of BNSS is filed by the applicant-accused Love Mehra S/o Bhojraj seeking bail in respect of a criminal case registered as FIR No.129/2025 dated 25.04.2025 registered at P.S. Vigyan Nagar, District - Kota, for the offence under Sections 109(1), 126(1), 189(2) of BNS. 2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the matter and the investigation against him is complete and he is no more required in investigation. He further submits that there are no chance of fleeing of applicant accused from the jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court. He also submits that the applicant undertakes not to repeat offence and cooperate with investigation/trial, which will take time. [2025:RJ-JP:49043] (2 of 5) [CRLMB-14758/2025] 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the injured has been examined as PW-4 and Injury No. 1, which has been opined as grievous and dangerous to life, has been attributed to Bobby Mehra and not to present petitioner. He further submitted that three alleged eyewitnesses—PW-1 Nitesh @ Nikku, PW-2 Chetan, and PW-3 Kuldeep—have turned hostile and have not supported the case of the prosecution. He further submitted that in the cross- examination of PW-4, the injured specifically clarified that the present petitioner did not assault him on any vital part of the body. He further submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 26.04.2025 and the conclusion of trial is likely to take considerable time. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application and submitted that the allegations are grave and serious in nature. 5. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner-accused and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material placed on record by both the parties. 6. The first bail application of the petitioner was dismissed on 04.09.2025 wherein we have observed as under: “On the basis of report lodged by complainant Nikku Sharma on 25.04.2025 for incident of stabbing by Bobby, Love and Anshul from Knives, thereby causing injuries upon Himanshu, a report is registered and the matter is investigated. During investigation the statement of injured Sameer @ Himanshu were recorded under Sections 180 and 183 of BNSS. The injury report is prepared along with [2025:RJ-JP:49043] (3 of 5) [CRLMB-14758/2025] treatment record. As per injury report Himanshu has sustained four injuries from sharp edged object, wherein injury no.4 was opined as simple but after treatment record injury nos. 2 and 3 were found as simple in nature. The injury no.1 which is on scapula was found as dangerous to life and grievous in nature. After investigation police has filed a charge-sheet after arrest of accused on 26.04.2025. Co-accused Shoaib Hussain was alrelady granted bail. Two criminal cases were registered against Bobby Mehra and one against Love Mehra. The material on record clearly indicate that both the petitioners were having knives and both have assaulted injured Sameer @ Himanshu. The injury no.1 is specifically assigned to Bobby but it is apparent that injury no.2 on right side of back lateral to spine is also caused by sharp edged weapon. Both the petitioners are named in FIR, who used knives to assault, therefore, their case is different from the case of Shoaib Hussain.” 7. In examination-in-chief, the injured has named four persons who assaulted with knife and named Nikku and Chetan, who took him to the hospital. However, both Nikku (PW-1) and Chetan (PW-2) have turned hostile. Even Kuldeep, who was named by the police as an eyewitness was examined as PW- 3, has also turned hostile. Injury No. 1 has been opined as dangerous to life. It is a case of poor prosecution that the Public Prosecutor has failed to specify the injury and also specific attribution and assault made by the accused, facing trial. It appears that Public Prosecutor appointed in court of [2025:RJ-JP:49043] (4 of 5) [CRLMB-14758/2025] learned Additional Sessions Judge No.6, Kota is not having enough competency to conduct prosecution on behalf of State of Rajasthan. 8. Upon hearing the arguments and perusing the record, we have found that the applicant-accused is no more required in the investigation and he is in custody for quite some time. The further proceedings will take its own time, therefore, looking to entirety of facts and circumstances of the case and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, the Court deems it appropriate to grant bail to the applicant- accused. 9. Thus, the instant bail application filed on behalf of applicant- accused Love Mehra S/o Bhojraj, is hereby allowed and the applicant-accused is ordered to be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond of ₹50,000/- with two sureties of like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant-accused shall not tamper with evidence or influence the witness in any manner. (ii) The applicant-accused shall not indulge in any criminal activity and shall not repeat any criminal offence punishable under the Law. (iii) The applicant-accused shall attend the hearing of the Trial Court on the date fixed by the Trial court or as and when asked to appear before the Trial Court. (iv) In case of any violation of above conditions, the bail granted to the applicant-accused shall be liable to be canceled. [2025:RJ-JP:49043] (5 of 5) [CRLMB-14758/2025] 10. The Registry is directed to send a copy of this order to the Trial Court through E-mail. 11. Before parting the order, it is appropriate to send a copy of this order to the Principal Secretary, Law and Litigation to ensure an action against the Public Prosecutor appointed in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge No.6, Kota and apprise this Court with the action initiated against the Public Prosecutor, within six weeks. (ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J PREETI VALECHA /07