[2026:RJ-JD:3852]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 2nd Bail Application No. 653/2026

1. Ankit Kumar S/o Prakash, Aged About 23 Years, R/o Dabaycha Police Station Patiya District Udaipur. ( At Present Lodged In District Jail Dungarpur)

2. Tarun Kumar S/o Magan Lal, Aged About 19 Years, R/o Dabaycha Police Station Patiya District Udaipur. ( At Present Lodged In District Jail Dungarpur)

----Petitioners Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Jitendra Ojha For Respondent(s) : Mr. Narendra Gehlot, PP Ms. Mitali Vaishnav for complainant HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL BENIWAL

Order

21/01/2026

1. This 2^nd application for bail has been filed by the petitioners under Section 483 of BNSS (old Section 439 of Cr.P.C.) in connection with FIR No. 121/2025 dated 17.09.2025, Police Station Patiya, District Udaipur, for the offences under Sections

126(2), 115(2), 191(2) and 110 of the BNS, 2023.

2. First S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application was dismissed as not pressed vide order dated 24.11.2025 passed by this Court.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in the case and false allegations have been levelled against them. He further submits that as per the allegation levelled in the FIR and as revealed in the investigation, the petitioner No.1-Ankit Kumar was having axe in his hand and he has caused injury on the head of the injured Rahul. The allegation against the petitioner No.2-Tarun Kumar was that he inflicted injury by using wooden stick. As per the injury report, there is no sharp injury as observed. Since no injury is observed in the injury report, therefore the involvement of petitioner No.1-Ankir Kumar in the present incident is highly doubtful. As far as the petitioner No.2-Tarun Kumar is concerned, he is alleged to be carrying wooden stick. Out of the six injuries, only one injury is stated to be dangerous to life. As far as the injury No.3 is concerned, the same was found on the back of Rahul, however, there is no allegation as such against the petitioner No.2-Tarun Kumar of inflicting any injury on Rahul on his back.

3.1 Learned counsel also submits that both the parties have arrived at an amicable settlement. The petitioners are in judicial custody since 27.10.2025 and the trial will take sufficiently long time, therefore, they deserve to be enlarged on bail.

4. Learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposes this bail application and submits that serious allegation of offences under Section 307 of the IPC have been alleged and specific role has been assigned to the present petitioners, therefore, they may not be granted the benefit of bail.

5. Learned counsel for the complainant does not oppose the bail application and submits that the parties have amicably settled the issue. She further submits that she has no objection if the petitioners are enlarged on bail.

6. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Public Prosecutor and perused the material available on record.

7. Having considered the rival submissions, facts and circumstances of this case and after perusing the challan so also the fact that the injury No.3 was found to be grievous in nature, however, there is no allegation against the present petitioners of inflicting such injury which was found to be in the back of the injured Rahul, in the considered opinion of this Court, no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioners behind the bars for an indefinite period as the trial will take sufficiently long time. Thus, without expressing any opinion on merits/demerits of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the bail application filed by the petitioners deserves to be accepted.

8. Accordingly, the bail application filed under Section 483 of BNSS is allowed. It is ordered that petitioners- Ankit Kumar S/o Prakash, and Tarun Kumar S/o Magan Lal, shall be released on bail in connection with the aforesaid FIR; provided th