[2026:RJ-JP:14193] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 4223/2026 1. Altmash @ Jubair @ Chhotu S/o Shahir @ Shahin, Aged About 22 Years, R/o Jogi Mohalla Chhabra Police Thana Chhabra District Baran Rajasthan. (At Present Confined At District Jail Baran) 2. Ashu @ Shakir S/o Shanu, Aged About 19 Years, R/o Lota Bhairu Kumharon Ka Mohalla Chhabra Police Thana Chhabra District Baran Rajasthan. (At Present Confined At District Jail Baran) ----Petitioners Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Abdul Kalam Khan Mr. Sandeep Solankey For Complainant(s) For State : : Mr. Aman Ali Ms. Aarti Sharma, P.P. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA Order 06/04/2026 1. At the very outset, the learned counsel for the accused- petitioners submits that he may be permitted to withdraw the bail application to the extent of accused-petitioner No.1, Altmash @ Jubair @ Chhotu. 2. In view of the prayer made by the learned counsel for accused-petitioners, the present bail application qua accused- petitioner No.1, Altmash @ Jubair @ Chhotu, is dismissed as withdrawn. [2026:RJ-JP:14193] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-4223/2026] 3. Accused-petitioner No.2, Ashu @ Shakir S/o Shanu (for short ‘petitioner No.2’), has filed this bail application under Section 483 B.N.S.S., arising out of F.I.R. No.93/2026 registered with the Police Station Chhabra, District Baran, for offence under Sections 190, 191(2), 191(3). 115(2), 118(1), 109(1) and 126(2) of B.N.S., 2023. 4. As regards petitioner No.2, the learned counsel submits that petitioner No.2, has been falsely implicated in this case. He also submits that in the statement of the injured, Aamil, there is no allegation against petitioner No.2 of causing any injury to him. He also submits that petitioner No.2 is in custody since 18.02.2026 and is no more required for any kind of interrogation and recovery. He also submits that trial of the case is likely to take considerable time to conclude, therefore, petitioner No.2 may be enlarged on bail. 5. The learned Public Prosecutor assisted by the learned counsel for the complainant has vehemently opposed the bail application. The learned counsel for the complainant submits that in the statement of the injured, Saddam, there are allegations against petitioner No.2 of causing injury to injured, Aamil, with a steel pile. 6. Considered the submissions made at bar and also perused the case diary. 7. As per the F.I.R., no specific overt act has been assigned to petitioner No.2. In the statement of the injured, Aamil, there is no allegation against petitioner No.2 of causing any [2026:RJ-JP:14193] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-4223/2026] injury to him. In the statement of the injured, Saddam, the allegation against petitioner No.2 is of inflicting injury to injured, Aamil, with a steel pipe, whereas, injured, Aamil, has not made any such allegation against him. 8. In the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and taking into consideration that in the F.I.R., there is no specific overt act assigned petitioner No.2, so also the statement of the injured, Aamil, this Court without expressing any opinion on the merits and demerits of the case, deems just and proper to enlarge the accused-petitioner No.2, Ashu @ Shakir S/o Shanu, on bail. 9. Accordingly, this bail application is allowed qua- accused-petitioner No.2, Ashu @ Shakir S/o Shanu, and it is directed that petitioner No.2 shall be released on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lac only) together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) each to the satisfaction of the trial Court with the stipulation that he shall appear before that Court and any Court to which the matter be transferred, on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so. (GANESH RAM MEENA),J ARTI SHARMA /68