[2026:RJ-JP:13297] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 3504/2026 Rameshwar S/o Shri Ramdev, Aged About 54 Years, R/o Mandiyon Ki Dhani, Dhamana, Police Station Maujmabad, District Jaipur, Rajasthan. (At Present In Sub Jail Sambhar Lake, District Jaipur). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent Connected With S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 3600/2026 Gajanand S/o Chandaram, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Mandiyon Ki Dhani, Dhamana, Police Station Maujmabad, District Jaipur, Rajasthan. (At Present In Sub Jail, Sambhar Lake, District Jaipur). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sneh Deep Khyaliya, Adv. For Respondent(s) For Complainant(s) : : Ms. Arti Sharma, PP with Mr. M.S. Shekhawat, PP Mr. Rajesh Maharshi, Adv. with Mr. Devanshu Saini, Adv. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 24/03/2026 1. These bail applications under Section 483 of BNSS have been filed on behalf of the petitioners, who have been arrested in connection with FIR No.79/2025 registered at Police Station Maujmabad, District Jaipur (Rural) for offences punishable under Sections 189(2), 191(2), 191(3), 126(2), 115(2), 109(1) & 103(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, (in short ‘BNS’) 2023. After completion of investigation, Police filed charge-sheet in this matter [2026:RJ-JP:13297] (2 of 4) [CRLMB-3504/2026] for offences punishable under Sections 189(2), 190, 191(2), 191(3), 126(2), 117(2), 118(1), 115(2), 109(1), 103(1) & 61(2) of the BNS, 2023. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that the accused-petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel submits that cross cases have been registered between the parties. It is submitted that petitioner Gajanand is not named in the FIR. Counsel submits that the main allegation of causing axe injury on the person of deceased Bajrang is against co- accused Ram Singh Dudi. Counsel submits that there is no allegations against the petitioners of causing any injury on the person of the deceased. Counsel further submits that there is no criminal antecedent against petitioner Gajanand whereas, one other case has been registered against petitioner Rameshwar. Counsel contends that no recovery has been made from the possession of the petitioner Rameshwar and he has also received injuries in the incident. He further submits that co-accused Jawaharlal has already been enlarged on bail by this Court and the case of the present petitioners is identical to that of the co- accused. Counsel submits that the petitioners are in custody since their date of arrest and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. Further custody of the petitioners would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned State Counsel assisted by learned counsel for the complainant opposes the submissions advanced on behalf of the petitioners. It is submitted that the petitioners actively participated in commission of the crime. He submits that the petitioners remained absconded for a long period and therefore, [2026:RJ-JP:13297] (3 of 4) [CRLMB-3504/2026] Investigating Agency announced cash reward on them for their arrest. It is submitted that looking to the nature and gravity of offence, the petitioners do not deserve indulgence of bail. They, thus, crave dismissal of these bail applications. To buttress the contentions, learned State Counsel has relied upon the judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court rendered in the cases of Ashok Dhankad Vs. State of NCT of Delhi & Ors. [MANU/SC/1082/2025] and State of Karnataka Vs. Darshan & Ors. [MANU/SC/1098/2025]. 4. I have considered the contentions. 5. So far as the judgments relied upon by the State Counsel is concerned, the said judgments were passed in different factual matrix. 6. 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 the main allegation of causing axe injury on the person of deceased Bajrang is against co-accused Ram Singh Dudi, as also considering the fact that co-accused Jawaharlal has already been enlarged on bail by this Court and the fact that evidence available on record does not indicate that the petitioners have caused any injury on the person of the deceased 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 these bail applications. 7. These bail applications are accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioners- (1) Rameshwar S/o Shri Ramdev and (2) Gajanand S/o Chandaram shall be released [2026:RJ-JP:13297] (4 of 4) [CRLMB-3504/2026] 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. 8. The observations made hereinabove are only for decision of these bail applications and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J Manoj Solanki /86 & 87