[2025:RJ-JP:12046] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous II Bail Application No. 3272/2025 Manvendra S/o Mukesh, Aged About 24 Years, R/o Basai Neem, Thana Kotwali, District Dholpur. (Accused Petitioner Presently Confined In District Jail, Dholpur). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. R.R. Baisla For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sudesh Saini, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR Order 18/03/2025 1. The instant second bail application has been filed under Section 483 BNSS on behalf of accused-petitioner. The petitioner has been arrested in connection with FIR No. 663/2024 registered at Police Station Kotwali, District Dholpur for the offence(s) under Sections 189(2), 115(2), 126(2) and 109(1) of BNS. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the accused- petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. The first bail application of the accused-petitioner was dismissed vide order dated 13.02.2025 as withdrawn, thereafter police has charge- sheeted the present accused-petitioner for the offence under Sections 189(2), 115(2), 126(2) and 109(1) of BNS and Section 3/25 (1a) of the Arms Act. It is contended that the complainant party also caused injuries to petitioner’s party and co-accused Manoj sustained two injuries, cross-case was also lodged against [2025:RJ-JP:12046] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-3272/2025] the complainant party. No fire-arm injuries were found at the body parts of the injured Ramkesh, Daulatram, Gopal and Bheemsain. Injuries sustained to the injured are also neither at vital parts nor dangerous to life. There are no criminal antecedents against the petitioner. The accused petitioner is in custody since 15.12.2024 and charge-sheet has already been submitted before the concerned court. The trial of the case will take considerable time, therefore, the benefit of bail may be granted to the accused- petitioner. 3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposes the second bail application and submitted the factual reports of both the cross cases. It is contended that the accused petitioner caused multiple injuries to injured Parasaram and Gopal, from the place of occurrence empty cartridges were recovered. At the instance of the present accused-petitioner hand-made pistol was recovered and petitioner is also charge-sheeted for the offence under Section 3/25 of the Arms Act, therefore his second bail application deserves to be dismissed. 4. Heard and perused the material and factual report available on the record. 5. Injuries sustained to injured Bhimsain, Gopal, Daulatram, Ramkesh and Parasram were opined to be simple blunt in nature. Concerned medical jurist has not opined the injuries caused to the above injured are gun-shot injuries and no pallets etc. were recovered from the body parts of injured. It is alleged against the complainant party that they also caused gun-shot injuries to co- accused Manoj and Dileep and gun-shot injuries were found at body parts of the co-accused. Without commenting anything on [2025:RJ-JP:12046] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-3272/2025] the merits of the case, I deem it just and proper to enlarge the accused-petitioner on bail. 6. Accordingly, the second bail application under Section 483 BNSS is allowed and it is ordered that the accused-petitioner Manvendra S/o Mukesh, in connection with FIR No. 663/2024 registered at Police Station Kotwali, District Dholpur shall be enlarged on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for his appearance before the court concerned on all the dates of hearing as and when called upon to do so. (PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J ashu /27