[2026:RJ-JP:1834] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 716/2026 Nitin S/o Mahaveer Singh, Aged About 20 Years, R/o Nevada, P.s. Halena, District Bharatpur (Raj.) (Accused At Present Confined In Central Jail Bharatpur). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mritunjya Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Manvendra Singh, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR Order 16/01/2026 1. The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 BNSS on behalf of accused-petitioner. The petitioner has been arrested in connection with FIR No. 621/2025 registered at Police Station Mathuragate, District Bharatpur for the offence(s) under Section 109(1) of BNS. 2. Learned counsel for the accused-petitioner submits that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Learned counsel further submits that there is no substantive evidence available on the record against the petitioner. It is alleged against the petitioner that he alongwith the co-accused has fired at complainant Arjun which resulted into leg injury. It is also contended that the motor cycle of petitioner was used for commission of offence is also not proved, the petitioner has been involved in the case solely on the basis of doubt. The accused- [2026:RJ-JP:1834] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-716/2026] petitioner is in custody since 21.11.2025 and trial of the case may take considerable time, therefore, the bail application of the accused-petitioner may be allowed. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application and contended that the accused-petitioner alongwith the other co-accused Jagat Singh fired at the complainant and and in order to commit robbery fire arm was used which was recovered at the instance of co-accused Jagat Singh. The petitioner's motor-cycle was used for commission of the offence and the said motor cycle was recovered at the instance of petitioner, furthermore the petitioner was involved in two other criminal cases, therefore the bail application of the accused- petitioner may be dismissed. 4. Heard and perused the material available on record. 5. The recovery of fire arm was effected from the other co- accused Jagat Singh. The FIR was lodged in the police station against two unknown persons, therefore considering the above facts, without commenting anything on the merits of the case, I deem it just and proper to enlarge the accused-petitioner on bail. 6. Accordingly, the bail application under Section 483 BNSS is allowed and it is ordered that the accused-petitioner Nitin S/o Mahaveer Singh, in connection with FIR No. 621/2025 registered at Police Station Mathuragate, District Bharatpur 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 and as and when [2026:RJ-JP:1834] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-716/2026] called upon to do so. The concerned trial Judge shall verify the address and contact details of the sureties through concerned SHO before releasing the accused-petitioners on bail. 7. The accused is also directed to mark his presence on 25th of every month till conclusion of trial before the concerned police station. The SHO of the concerned police station shall send the presence report of the accused petitioner on the same day to the trial court every month. In case of any breach to the above condition, the learned Public Prosecutor shall be free to move the application against the petitioner for cancellation of the bail before the concerned Court. 8. The accused-petitioner is also directed to submit his present address along with the mobile number to the concerned SHO within seven days of release and the concerned SHO shall verify the said address and the mobile number. In case if the petitioner changes his address or mobile number, he shall submit the same before the concerned SHO so also before the concerned learned trial court. 9. A copy of this order shall be sent to the concerned SHO for its strict compliance. (PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J Keshav/14