[2026:RJ-JP:22001] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 1308/2026 Surendra S/o Shivcharan, Aged 23 Years, R/o Kunkata Khurd, P.s Sadar Gangapur City, District Sawaimadhopur (Raj.) (At Present Confined In Sub Jail Gangapur City). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent Connected With S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 4676/2026 Prithviraj @ Nandu @ Prince S/o Manoj Kumar, Aged About 24 Years, R/o Ward No. 44, Saloda Mod, Gangapur City, Police Station Udai Mod, District Sawai Madhopur (Raj.) (The Accused Petitioner Presently Confined In Sub Jail, Gangapur City). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 4967/2026 Udham Singh @ Vivek S/o Shyamlal, Aged About 24 Years, R/o Bhinora, Police Station Batoda, District Sawai Madhopur, Rajasthan. (At Present Confined In District Jail Gangapur City). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sudhir Jain Mr. Narendra Meena Mr. RajneeshGupta Mr. Puneet Raj Meena Mr. Manish K. Saini For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vivek Chaudhary, PP Mr. A.K. Gupta Sr. Adv. assisted by [2026:RJ-JP:22001] (2 of 4) [CRLMB-1308/2026] Mr. Sarwat Alam Mr. Mukesh Pal Jadaun HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR Order 25/05/2026 1. These instant bail applications have been filed under Section 483 BNSS on behalf of accused-petitioners. The accused- petitioners have been arrested in connection with FIR No. 351/2025 registered at Police Station Gangapur City, District Sawaimadhopur for the offences under Sections 109(1), 111(2) (a), 331(7) and 189(2) of BNS and Sections 3, 25(6) of Arms Act. 2. Learned counsel for the accused-petitioners submit that the accused-petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. It is alleged in the FIR that the shot fired at the complainant- Mahendra was at the instigation of the present petitioners, however there exists no substantive evidence to connect the petitioner with the alleged crime. The specific allegations regarding the use of firearms and causing injuries to Mahendra and Jitesh have been levelled against D.C. Bainsla, Ashish Gurjar, and Golu Bainsla. The direct enmity was with Krishna. The accused-petitioners are in custody since long and the trial of the case may take considerable time, therefore, the bail application of the accused-petitioner may be allowed. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the complainant have vehemently opposed the bail application. It is argued that an FIR was lodged against the petitioner alleging demand of money and extortion. It is further alleged that the [2026:RJ-JP:22001] (3 of 4) [CRLMB-1308/2026] attack on the injured Mahendra was carried out at the instance of the present petitioner and co-accused Krishna Bansrota. It is also contended that, prior to the incident, telephonic conversations had taken place between the petitioner Mahendra, and the main co- accused Krishana Bansrota. Furthermore, it is submitted that the petitioners are habitual offenders and several cases relating to offences under the IPC have been registered against them, therefore their bail application may be dismissed. 4. Heard and perused the material available on record. 5. Considering the fact that the specific allegations regarding the use of firearms and causing injuries to Mahendra and Jitesh have been levelled against D.C. Bainsla, Ashish Gurjar, and Golu Bainsla and further considering that the enmity existed between the injured Mahendra and co-accused Krishana, it appears that apart from the call detail records reflecting communication between the petitioner and Krishana, no other evidence is available on record to indicate the involvement of the petitioners in the alleged conspiracy. The accused-petitioner are in custody since long and the trial of the case may take considerable time. The charge-sheet has already been submitted before the concerned trial court, therefore without commenting anything on the merits of the case, I deem it just and proper to enlarge the accused-petitioners on bail. 6. Accordingly, the bail applications under Section 483 BNSS are allowed and it is ordered that the accused-petitioners 1. Surendra S/o Shivcharan, 2. Prithviraj @ Nandu @ Prince S/o Manoj Kumar, 3. Udham Singh @ Vivek S/o Shyamlal, in connection with FIR No. 351/2025 registered at Police Station [2026:RJ-JP:22001] (4 of 4) [CRLMB-1308/2026] Gangapur City, District Sawaimadhopur shall be enlarged on bail provided they furnish a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for their appearance before the court concerned on all the dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so. The concerned trial Judge shall verify the address and contact details of the sureties through concerned SHO before releasing the accused-petitioners on bail. 7. The accused-petitioner are also directed to mark their presence on 25th of every month till conclusion of trial before the concerned police station. The SHO of the concerned police station shall send the presence report of the accused petitioners on the same day to the trial court every month. In case of any breach to the above condition, the learned Public Prosecutor shall be free to move the application against the petitioners for cancellation of the bail before the concerned Court. 8. The accused-petitioners are also directed to submit their present address along with the mobile number to the concerned SHO within seven days of release and the concerned SHO shall verify the said address and the mobile number. In case if the petitioners changes their address or mobile number, they shall submit the same before the concerned SHO so also before the concerned learned trial court. 9. A copy of this order shall be sent to the concerned SHO for its strict compliance. (PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J 11-13/ashu/416