[2026:RJ-JP:1030] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 17112/2025 Aamin Khan S/o Shri Sal Khan, Aged About 55 Years, R/o Village Mancha, Teh. Kishangarh Bas, Distt. Khairthal-Tijara (Rajasthan) (Presently In Sub Jail, Kishangarh Bas). ----Accused-Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Atul Sharma, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vivek Choudhary, PP and Ms. Shazadi Bano, Adv., on behalf of Mr. Ali Mohammed Khan, Adv., for complainant. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 09/01/2026 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.372/2025 registered at Police Station Kishangarh Bas, District Khairthal-Tijara for offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 189(2), 332(c) and 74 of BNS, 2023. After completion of investigation, police filed charge-sheet in this matter. 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 co-accused of this case namely, Jahul and Robin Khan have already been granted benefit of bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court. He further submits that injured Kayam has suffered one grievous injury on his head, same is attributed to the co-accused Irfan. He argues that according to the impugned order, there is one grievous injury sustained to injured [2026:RJ-JP:1030] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-17112/2025] Sahun has been opined as dangerous to life, but in the charge- sheet, there is no injury report of injured Sahun. He further argues that this fact was noted by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court while granting benefit of bail co-accused Robin Khan and Jahul. He contends that trial of the case will take considerable time in its conclusion. He further contends that the petitioner is in custody since 14.11.2025 and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor assisted by learned counsel for the complainant vehemently opposes the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that the petitioner is a habitual offender as eight 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 the fact that other co-accused of this case namely, Jahul and Robin Khan have been granted benefit of bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court; charge-sheet has been filed and trial will take 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 proper to allow the bail application. 6. This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner– Aamin Khan S/o Shri Sal Khan shall be released on bail provided, he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) together with two [2026:RJ-JP:1030] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-17112/2025] 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 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. Considering the criminal antecedents of the petitioner, 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 shall record the presence of the petitioner in Roznamcha. 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 observation made hereinabove is only for decision of the instant bail application and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J MADAN/166