[2026:RJ-JP:1498] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 16131/2025 1. Om @ Omprakash S/o Balveer, R/o Nimoda Harizi Police Station Digod District Kota (Raj.) (At Present Confined At District Jail Kota). 2. Raju @ Rajendra S/o Ramdev, R/o Nimoda Harizi Police Station Digod District Kota (Raj.) (At Present Confined At District Jail Kota). ----Petitioners Versus The State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Dr. Mahesh Sharma, Adv. with Ms. Harshita Sharma, Adv. For Respondent(s) For Complainant(s) : : Mr. Amit Punia, PP Mr. Dushyant Singh Naruka, Adv. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 13/01/2026 1. The instant bail application under Section 483 of BNSS has been filed on behalf of the petitioners, who have been arrested in connection with FIR No.118/2025 registered at Police Station Digod, District Kota Rural for offences punishable under Sections 110, 126(2), 115(2), 189(2), 324(4) & 324(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, (in short ‘BNS’) 2023. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that accused-petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel submits that there is no specific allegation against the petitioners of causing grievous injury on the person of the injured Gyanchand and Malkhan. It is contended that none of the injury [2026:RJ-JP:1498] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-16131/2025] sustained to the injured has been opined as dangerous to life. It is submitted that there are no criminal antecedents against the petitioners of similar nature and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. It is further submitted that petitioners are in custody since 08.11.2025 and further custody of the petitioners would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor assisted by the learned counsel for the complainant opposes the bail application. They submit that injured- Gyanchand has sustained three injuries and injured- Malkhan has sustained five injuries and same have been opined as grievous in nature. It is submitted that apart from the present case, one other case has been registered against the petitioners however, they fairly concede that the case is not of similar nature. 4. I have considered the contentions. 5. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the arguments advanced by counsel for the parties, especially considering the fact that none of the injury sustained to the injured persons has been opined as dangerous to life, as also the fact that there are no criminal antecedents against the petitioners of similar nature and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion as well as looking to the period of custody, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it fit and proper to allow this bail application. 6. The bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioners- (1) Om @ Omprakash S/o Balveer and (2) Raju @ Rajendra S/o Ramdev shall be released on bail provided each of them furnishes a personal bond in the sum [2026:RJ-JP:1498] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-16131/2025] 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. 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 Manoj Solanki /46