[2025:RJ-JP:12376] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 2nd Bail Application No. 1560/2025 Khuswant Singh S/o Shri Ram Singh, Aged About 21 Years, R/o Ward No. 4, Jawaja, Police Station Jawaja, District Beawar (Raj.) (At Present Confined In Central Jail, Ajmer). ----Accused-Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Aayush Agarwal, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 19/03/2025 1. The instant 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.261/2024 registered at Police Station Jawaja, District Beawar for the offences punishable under Sections 137(2), 115(2), 127(2), 133 & 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, (in short ‘BNS’) 2023, Sections 7/8 of POCSO Act and Section 84 of JJ Act. Later on, Police filed charge-sheet in this matter for the offences punishable under Sections 137(2), 115(2), 127(2), 133 & 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, (in short ‘BNS’) 2023, Sections 7/8 of POCSO Act, Section 84 of JJ Act and Section 67 of IT Act. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that first bail application of the petitioner was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 29.11.2024 with liberty to renew the prayer of bail [2025:RJ-JP:12376] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-1560/2025] after recording testimony of victim. Now, victim has been examined during the course of the trial. Thus, this second bail application has been preferred by the petitioner. 3. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. It appears from the testimony of the victim, co-accused- Mandeep is principal accused and who has been granted benefit of bail by the learned Juvenile Justice Board as at the time of alleged incident, he was aged about 17 years and 3 months. He further submits that it is admitted by the victim in cross-examination that there is no video available on record showing the fact that the petitioner caused any injury upon him. He argues that charge-sheet has been filed, there are no criminal antecedents against the petitioner and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. He contends that petitioner is in custody since 11.08.2024 and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner. He submits that complainant/victim of this case has duly been informed about hearing of this bail application. 5. Despite information, no one has appeared on behalf of the complainant. 6. I have considered the contentions. 7. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner as also looking to the material made available on record in the form of charge-sheet including [2025:RJ-JP:12376] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-1560/2025] testimony of the victim so also considering the fact that co- accused person has been granted benefit of bail by the learned Juvenile Justice Board; absence of criminal antecedents and trial will take time in its conclusion as well as looking to the period of custody, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it proper to allow the second bail application. 8. This second bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner - Khuswant Singh S/o Shri Ram Singh shall be released on bail provided he 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 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. 9. The observations made herein above is only for decision of the instant bail application and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J MADAN/S-170