[2025:RJ-JP:7669] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Second Bail Application No. 2566/2025 Sachin S/o Rajaram, R/o Khoobpura, Police Station Kudgaon, District Karauli (Rajasthan) (Presently Confined In District Jail, Karauli). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajneesh Gupta For Respondent(s) For Complainant(s) : : Ms. Arti Sharma, PP Mr. Mukesh Goyal HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 20/02/2025 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.130/2024 registered at Police Station Kudgaon, District Karauli Rajasthan) for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 351(2), 189(2) & 109(1) of BNS. Later on, police filed charge-sheet in this matter for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 351(2), 189(2), 109(1), 324(4), 110, 118(1), 125, 118(2) & 117(2) of BNS. 2. First bail application of the petitioner was dismissed by this Court vide order dated 28.01.2025. Thus, this second bail application has been preferred on behalf of petitioner. [2025:RJ-JP:7669] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-2566/2025] 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel submits that dispute has been resolved between the parties amicably. Counsel submits that there are no criminal antecedents of the petitioner. Petitioner is in custody since 09.11.2024 trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. Further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner. She submits that there is no material change in the circumstances after rejection of first bail application of the petitioner. 5. Complainant as well as injured are present in person and have duly been identified by their counsel. Learned counsel appearing for the complainant does not dispute the factum of compromise. He submits that complainant has no objection if this second bail application is allowed. 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, especially the fact that dispute has been resolved amicably between the parties; charge-sheet has been filed in this matter; absence of criminal antecedents of the petitioner; period of custody, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it fit and proper to allow this second bail application. 8. This second bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner -Sachin S/o Rajaram shall be [2025:RJ-JP:7669] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-2566/2025] 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 observation made hereinabove 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 LALIT MOHAN /38