[2025:RJ-JP:9878] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous II Bail Application No. 3158/2025 1. Ravikant S/o Hemraj, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Khajurna Khurd, P.S. Anta District Baran (Raj.). 2. Nandkishore S/o Shri Ramgopal, Aged About 41 Years, R/o Khajurna Khurd, P.S. Anta District Baran (Raj.). (At Present Confined In District Jail Baran). ----Accused-Petitioners Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pradeep Kumar Sharma, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP with Mr. Shubham Sain, AAAG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 05/03/2025 1. The instant second bail application has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS on behalf of the petitioners, who have been arrested in connection with FIR No.462/2024 registered at Police Station Anta, District Baran for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 307 and 189(2) of BNS, 2023. Later on, Police filed charge-sheet in this matter for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 109(1), 117(2) and 3(5) of BNS, 2023. 2. First bail application of the petitioners was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file fresh bail application after [2025:RJ-JP:9878] (2 of 4) [CRLMB-3158/2025] submission of the result of investigation. Now, charge-sheet has been filed. Thus, this second bail application has been preferred by the petitioners. 3. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that the accused-petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. Learned counsel submits that injured of this case was examined by the medical expert on 06.12.2024 and as the concerned doctor gave its opinion that after seeing all x-rays, record made available by SHO, injury nos.1, 2 and 3 are grievous in nature and injury no.4 is simple in nature and that all treatment records and x-ray were handed over to the SHO. However, just after 15 days of the aforesaid medical examination, another medical report was prepared on 22.12.2024 on the basis of same medical records in which, it was opined that the injuries developed due to assault followed by operations are likely to be dangerous to life in absence of treatment. Learned counsel thus contends that medical reports are contradictory which creates doubt on the prosecution case. He argues that charge-sheet has already been filed and trial of the case will take considerable time in its conclusion. He contends that petitioners are in custody since 24.12.2024 and further custody of the petitioners would not serve any fruitful purpose. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners. 5. I have considered the contentions. [2025:RJ-JP:9878] (3 of 4) [CRLMB-3158/2025] 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 looking to the material made available in the form of charge-sheet including opinion expressed by the medical experts; period of custody and trial will take time in its conclusion but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it proper to allow the second bail application. 7. This second bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioners – 1. Ravikant S/o Hemraj and 2. Nandkishore S/o Shri Ramgopal 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. 8. 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, till trial is concluded. 9. Concerned SHO is directed to maintain a register recording the attendance of the petitioners, as directed above. In case the petitioners fail to mark their presence in the concerned police station, as directed above, the concerned SHO is directed to [2025:RJ-JP:9878] (4 of 4) [CRLMB-3158/2025] immediately report the matter to the concerned Court in this regard. 10. 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 MADAN/57