[2025:RJ-JP:35976] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 3282/2025 Mohit @ Monu Pahalwan S/o Shri Sitaram Meena, Aged About 24 Years, R/o Bhuda, Police Station Raini, District Alwar, Presently Kaptan Meena Colony, Purana Rupbas, Alwar, Police Station Aravali Vihar, District Alwar (Raj.). (Presently Confined At Sub Jail Rajgarh) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajeev Kumar Sogarwal For Respondent(s) : Mr. Tapesh Agarwal, PP with Mr. Gaurav Gupta, Asst. G.A. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 08/09/2025 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.63/2025 registered at Police Station Rajgarh (Alwar), District Alwar for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 109(1), 324(4) & 351(3) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (in short, ‘BNS’), 2023 and Section 27 of Arms Act. After completion of investigation, police filed charge-sheet in this matter for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 109(1), 324(4), 351(3), 61(2)(a) & 117(2) of BNS, 2023 and Sections 3/25, 5/27 & 25(6) 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 though, there is allegation against the petitioner of using firearm but no firearm injury has been found on the person of the injured. It is submitted that except one [2025:RJ-JP:35976] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-3282/2025] grievous injury on the forearm, all other injuries have been opined as simple in nature. Learned counsel contends that co-accused namely- Abhay Meena @ Ramotar has already been granted benefit of bail by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court. It is contended that trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. Counsel submits that petitioner is in custody since 06.02.2025 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 five 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, especially considering the material available on record in the form of charge-sheet including injury report which shows that except one grievous injury on the forearm, all other injuries are simple in nature, as also considering the fact that co-accused Abhay Meena @ Ramotar has already been granted benefit of bail by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court and trial will take considerable 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. This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner- Mohit @ Monu Pahalwan S/o Shri Sitaram Meena, shall be released on bail provided, he shall [2025:RJ-JP:35976] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-3282/2025] furnish 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 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. 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 bail application and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J CHARU SONI /42