[2026:RJ-JP:3769] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 2nd Bail Application No. 1502/2026 Mahesh S/o Late Shri Harkhyal, R/o Village Pali, Police Staton Suroth, District Karauli (Raj.) (At Present Confined In Central Jail, Shalyawas, Dausa) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. A. K. Gupta, Sr. Adv. With Mr. S.P.S. Chouhan Mr. Gaurav Sharma Mr. Gorang Agarwal Mr. Pulkit Raj For Respondent(s) For Complainant(s) : : Mr. Amit Punia, PP Mr. Sanjeev Sagarwal with, Mr. Aaditya Joshi HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 28/01/2026 1. This second bail application under Section 483 BNSS has been filed on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No. 216/2023 registered at Police Station Suroth, District Karauli (Raj.) for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149 & 302 of BNS, 2023 & 3/25 of Arms Act. 2. The first bail application filed on behalf of the petitioner was dismissed as withdrawn by this Court vide order dated 08.01.2025. Now, this second bail application has been preferred. 3. Mr. A.K. Gupta, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. He submits that similar situated co-accused person namely Harendra [2026:RJ-JP:3769] (2 of 4) [CRLMB-1502/2026] @ Piluwa has been granted bail by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Criminal Appeal No.5558/2025 after considering the period of incarceration and looking to the snail pace of the trial. It is submitted that other co-accused persons namely Laxman and Ramesh have also been granted bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court. Trial of the case will take considerable time in its conclusion. Petitioner is in custody since 13.06.2023 and as such he has suffered incarceration of almost two years and seven months. Further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor assisted by learned counsel for the complainant vehemently opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner. Learned counsel for the complainant submits that specific allegation has been levelled against the petitioner of causing fire arm injury on the person of the deceased, therefore, benefit of bail should not be granted to him. 5. I have considered the contentions. 6. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by both the parties as well as considering the material available on record especially considering the fact that co-accused person namely Harendra @ Piluwa has been granted benefit of bail by the Hon’ble Supreme Court vide order dated 18.12.2025 and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion as well as looking to the custody period which is more than two years and seven months, [2026:RJ-JP:3769] (3 of 4) [CRLMB-1502/2026] but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it proper to allow the second bail application. 7. This second bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner Mahesh S/o Late Shri Harkhyal shall be released on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.50,000/- each duly verified by the concerned Revenue Officer, 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. 8. 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 conclusion of the trial. 9. Concerned SHO shall enter attendance of the petitioner in the Roznamcha. In case the petitioner fails to mark his presence in the concerned police station, the concerned SHO is directed to immediately report the matter to the concerned Court in this regard. 10. 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. 11. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the concerned SHO for necessary compliance. [2026:RJ-JP:3769] (4 of 4) [CRLMB-1502/2026] 12. 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 PUNEET KUMAR /22