[2025:RJ-JP:9675] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 3205/2025 Pankaj Kumar S/o Samratlal, Aged About 24 Years, R/o Teela Ka Bas, Bhanokhar, Police Station Bahatukalan, District Alwar (Raj.). (Presently Confined In Central Jail Alwar). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Aatish Jain Mr. Rakesh Kumar Bairwa For Respondent(s) : Ms. Arti Sharma, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 05/03/2025 1. This instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.624/2024 registered at Police Station Rajgarh (Alwar), District Alwar (Raj.) for the offences punishable under Section 309(6) of BNS & Section 27 of Arms Act. After completion of investigation, police filed charge-sheet in this matter for the offences punishable under Sections 109(1), 310(2), 111(2) (b), 111(3), 111(5), 61(2)(a) & 118(2) of BNS and Sections 3, 5, 25 & 27 of Arms Act. 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 no initial evidence was available with the Investigation Officer to make arrest of the petitioner and he was arrested only on the basis of the fact that two hours prior [2025:RJ-JP:9675] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-3205/2025] of the alleged incident, call location of the petitioner was found near the place of incident. He submits that as per FIR, one tiffin and some oranges were looted by the petitioner. He argues that charge-sheet has already been filed and trial of the case will take considerable time in its conclusion. He contends that the petitioner is in custody since 02.11.2024 and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner. He submits that not only mobile location of the petitioner has been found near the place of incident but also country-made pistol has been recovered from him. He submits that two other cases have been registered against him. 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, as also the fact that charge-sheet has been filed 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 this bail application. 6. This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner – Pankaj Kumar S/o Samratlal 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 [2025:RJ-JP:9675] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-3205/2025] 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 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. 10. The observation made hereinabove is only for decision of these instant bail applications and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J LALIT MOHAN /66