[2025:RJ-JP:37551] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 2534/2025 Sugreev S/o Shri Bachan Singh, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Navlupura, P.s. Baseri, District Dholpur. (Accused Petitioner Presently Confined In District Jail, Dholpur). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Neeraj Sharma For Respondent(s) For Complainant(s) : : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP with Mr. Gaurav Gupta, Assistant GA Mr. Sachin Kumar HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 16/09/2025 1. This bail application has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.23/2025 registered at Police Station Baseri, District Dholpur for offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 127(2), 120(1), 308(2) & 119(1) of BNS, 2023. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel submits that offences punishable under Sections 308(2) and 119(1) of BNS, 2023 (Corresponding to Sections 384 and 327 of IPC) are not made out against the petitioner and rest of the offences are bailable in nature. Counsel submits that petitioner has been refused bail in this case solely on the basis of the fact that 21 other cases have been registered against him. It is submitted that [2025:RJ-JP:37551] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-2534/2025] petitioner has been acquitted in 11 cases. It is contended that trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. Counsel submits that petitioner is in custody since his date of arrest and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor assisted by learned counsel for complainant vehemently opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner. It is submitted that there is serious allegation against the petitioner of giving beatings to the complainant and demanding Rs.1,00,000/- from him. 4. At this stage, learned counsel for petitioner submits that neither any money has been received by the petitioner nor any injury report is available on record. 5. I have considered the contentions. 6. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioners, as also considering the material available before me and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion as well as looking to the custody period, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it proper to allow the bail application. 7. This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner – Sugreev S/o Shri Bachan 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 [2025:RJ-JP:37551] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-2534/2025] Court to which the matter is transferred, on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so. 8. However, it is made clear that the petitioner shall not involve in similar offence(s) during currency of bail granted by this Court. The petitioner is further directed to mark his presence in the concerned police station in first week of every month, till trial is concluded. 9. Concerned SHO is directed to maintain a register recording the attendance of the petitioner, as directed above. In case the petitioner fails to mark his presence in the concerned police station, as directed above, the concerned SHO is directed to immediately report the matter to the concerned Court in this regard. 10. If breach of any 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 the petitioner by this Court. 11. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the concerned SHO for necessary compliance. 12. The observations made hereinabove are only for decision of the bail application and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J GAUTAM JAIN /48