[2026:RJ-JP:4060] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 1614/2026 1. Tarif @ Shambhu S/o Sahabuddin @ Shabu, R/o Sudaka @ Sudaka, Police Station Nuh Mewat, Haryana. (at present confined in Sub Jail Kishangarhbas District Alwar). 2. Anish @ Anitha Khan S/o Majid, R/o Sudaka, Police Station Nuh Sadar, District Nuh Mewat, Haryana. (at present confined in Sub Jail Kishangarhbas District Alwar). ----Petitioners Versus The State of Rajasthan; through P.P. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Manjeet Kumar For Respondent(s) : Mr. Amit Punia, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 29/01/2026 1. This bail application under Section 483 of BNSS has been filed on behalf of the petitioners, who have been arrested in connection with FIR No.332/2025 registered at Police Station Bhiwadi Phase-III, District Bhiwadi (Raj.) for offences punishable under Sections 109(1), 121(1), 132, 303(2) & 112(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, (in short ‘BNS’) 2023, Sections 3/25 & 5/25 of Arms Act and Sections 6 & 8 of the Rajasthan Bovine Animal (Prohibition of Slaughter and Regulation of Temporary Migration or Export) Act, 1995. After completion of investigation, police filed charge-sheet in this matter for offences punishable under Sections 109(1), 121(1), 132, 303(2), 112(2), 111(3) & [2026:RJ-JP:4060] (2 of 4) [CRLMB-1614/2026] 61(2)(b) of the BNS 2023, Sections 3/25 & 5/25 of Arms Act and Sections 6 & 8 of the Rajasthan Bovine Animal (Prohibition of Slaughter and Regulation of Temporary Migration or Export) Act, 1995. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that the accused-petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. Learned counsel submits that false allegation of opening firearm on the police party has been levelled against the petitioners. He submits that the petitioners along with co-accused person were apprehended at the spot but no recovery of a firearm was made at the time of the arrest, however, later on, a firearm was recovered by the Investigating Agency at the instance of the co-accused. Counsel contends that the petitioners were brutally beaten by the police party due to which, both the petitioners and the co-accused person sustained fracture on their legs. It is submitted that co- accused, namely, Shahil urf Mohammad Sahil has already been granted benefit of bail by this Court. Counsel submits that two other cases have been registered against petitioner- Tarif @ Shambhu whereas one other case has been registered against petitioner- Anish @ Anitha Khan. It is submitted that trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. Counsel submits that the petitioners are in custody since 16.11.2025 and further custody of the petitioners would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions advanced on behalf of the petitioners. 4. I have considered the contentions. [2026:RJ-JP:4060] (3 of 4) [CRLMB-1614/2026] 5. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced at bar, especially considering the material available on record in the form of charge- sheet, as also the fact that aforementioned co-accused person has already been granted benefit of bail by 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-petitioners – (1) Tarif @ Shambhu S/o Sahabuddin @ Shabu and (2) Anish @ Anitha Khan S/o Majid shall be released on bail provided each of them furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty 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. 7. 7. Considering the criminal antecedents of the petitioners, 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 conclusion of the trial. 8. Concerned SHO shall enter attendance of the petitioners in the Roznamcha. In case the petitioners fail to mark their presence [2026:RJ-JP:4060] (4 of 4) [CRLMB-1614/2026] in the concerned police station, 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 the petitioners 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 LALIT MOHAN /30