[2025:RJ-JP:35450] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 3236/2025 Suresh Kumar Choudhary S/o Narayan Lal Choudhary, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Village Titriya, Lokdal Ki Dhani, Police Station Shivdashpura, District Jaipur South (Rajasthan) (At Present Accused Confined In Central Jail Jaipur). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Anshuman Saxena For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP with Mr. Gaurav Gupta, Assistant GA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 04/09/2025 1. The 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.286/2024 registered at Police Station Shivdaspura, District Jaipur City (South) for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 327, 379, 427, 307 & 34 of IPC. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Learned counsel submits that simple road accident has been converted into serious criminal offence. It is submitted that similarly situated co-accused person namely- Ashok Meena has been granted benefit of bail by learned trial court and bail has been denied to the petitioner only on the basis of the fact that eight other cases have been registered against him. It is also contended that none of the injuries sustained by the injured persons have been opined as [2025:RJ-JP:35450] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-3236/2025] dangerous to life and as per medical report, both the injured persons have sustained two grievous injuries on the non-vital part of the body. 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 opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that petitioner is a habitual offender as eight other cases have been registered against him. However, he fairly concedes that role attributed to the petitioner is similar to that of the co-accused person. 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 petitioners, especially considering the fact that both grievous injuries are on non-vital part of the body and similarly situated co-accused person has been granted benefit of bail by learned trial court and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it proper to allow the bail application. 6. This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner – Suresh Kumar Choudhary S/o Narayan Lal Choudhary 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 [2025:RJ-JP:35450] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-3236/2025] 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. 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 and third week of every month, 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 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. 10. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the concerned SHO for necessary compliance. 11. The observations made hereinabove are 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 GAUTAM JAIN /34