[2025:RJ-JP:5875] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 2042/2025 Lakhan S/o Bhagwansingh, Aged About 23 Years, R/o Aata, Thana Sohna, District Nuh Mewta, Presently Residing At Kasola Thana Kasola District Rewadi (Haryana) (Presently Confined In Kishangarh Bas) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent Connected With S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 2043/2025 Hemchand @ Kaliya S/o Rampratap, Aged About 24 Years, R/o Gujriwas Thana Kotkasim District Khairthal, Tijara (Raj.) (Presently Confined In Kishangarh Bas) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ashvin Garg For Respondent(s) : Ms. Arti Sharma, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 11/02/2025 1. These bail applications have been filed under Section 483 of BNSS on behalf of the petitioners, who have been arrested in connection with FIR No.378/2024 registered at Police Station Kotkasim, District Khairthan-Tijara (Rajasthan) for the offences punishable under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 115(2), 126(2), 329(3), 333, 324(4), 109(1) & 351(2) of BNS and Sections 3, 25, 25(6) & 5 of Arms Act. Later on, police file charge-sheet in this [2025:RJ-JP:5875] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-2042/2025] matter for the offences punishable under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 115(2), 126(2), 329(3), 333, 324(4), 109(1), 117(2), 118(2) & 351(2) of BNS and Sections 3, 25, 25(6), 27 & 5 of Arms Act. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel submits that there is land dispute between the parties. Counsel submits that three females have sustained injuries and one grievous injury has been found on the person of each female which is on non-vital part of the body. Counsel further submits that there are no criminal antecedents of the petitioners. Petitioners Lakhan & Hemchand @ Kalia are in custody since 06.11.2024 and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. Further custody of the petitioners would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by counsel for the petitioners. She submits that entire incident was captured in the CCTV cameras wherein petitioners are visible. 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, also the fact that charge-sheet has been filed in this matter; absence of criminal antecedents of the petitioners; period of custody of the petitioners and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it fit and proper to allow these bail applications. 6. These bail applications are accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioners (1) Lakhan S/o [2025:RJ-JP:5875] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-2042/2025] Bhagwansingh & (2) Hemchand @ Kaliya S/o Rampratap 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. In case the petitioners fail to mark their presence in the concerned police station, 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. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN), J LALIT MOHAN /53-54