[2025:RJ-JP:8930] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 2815/2025 Ranjeet Meena S/o Shri Shambhudayal, Aged About 22 Years, R/o Gram Bhora Thana, Simliya Dist. Kota Gramin. (At Present Confined In Central Jail, Kota). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ashvin Garg For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 28/02/2025 1. The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 BNSS on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.325/2024 registered at Police Station Kaithoon, District Kota Rural (Raj.) for the offences punishable under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 115(2), 103(1), 61(2)(b) of BNS, 2023, Section 3/25 of Arms Act and Sections 3(2)(v) & 3(2) (va) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. Later on, Police filed charge-sheet in this matter for the offences punishable under Sections 191(3), 190, 115(2), 103(1), 217(a), 238(a), 324(6) of BNS, 2023. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Learned counsel submits that according to the facts of the case, FIR was lodged on the basis of written report submitted by the co- [2025:RJ-JP:8930] (2 of 4) [CRLMB-2815/2025] accused Narendra Meena, wherein specific allegation was levelled by the co-accused Narendra Meena against five persons. He further submits that now co-accused Narendra Meena has been made accused by disbelieving story narrated by him. As per the prosecution case, one Vijendra Meena caused firearm injury on the person of the deceased. In support of this story statement of one independent witness – Jonesh Meena was recorded under Section 183 BNSS (164 Cr.P.C.) and according to his version, accused Vijendra Meena caused firearm injury on the person of the deceased due to which, he fell down. As per the said independent witnesses, petitioner Ranjeet Meena, Vijendra Meena and Narendra Meena picked him up and took him to the car. He also helped them in picking the deceased up. The statement of this witness under Section 183 BNSS (164 Cr.P.C.) was recorded on 19.07.2024 and on the same day, the petitioner was arrested and since then, he is behind the bars. He contends that charge-sheet has already been filed and trial of the case will take considerable time. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by the counsel for the petitioner, but he fairly concedes that allegation of causing sole firearm injury is against co-accused Vijendra Meena. He further submits that six other cases have been registered against the petitioner. 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 petitioner and also considering the fact appearing [2025:RJ-JP:8930] (3 of 4) [CRLMB-2815/2025] from the charge-sheet that allegation of causing firearm is against co-accused Vijendra Meena and trial will take 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. 6. 6. This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner Ranjeet Meena S/o Shri Shambhudayal, 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. 7. It is made clear that the accused-petitioner shall not involve in any other offence(s) during currency of the bail and he shall mark his presence in first week of every month in the concerned police station, till trial is concluded. 8. 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. 9. If any breach of these conditions is reported or come to the [2025:RJ-JP:8930] (4 of 4) [CRLMB-2815/2025] notice of the Court, the same shall alone be a reason for the trial Court to cancel the bail granted to him by this Court. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J CHARU SONI /43