The court granted bail to the petitioner in a robbery case, considering the duration of custody and the fact that the petitioner was already on bail in other pending cases, while imposing strict reporting conditions to ensure trial attendance.

Order

1. The petitioner has preferred this bail application under Section 483 of BNSS in FIR No.181/2023 registered at Police Station Peeplu, District Tonk for offences under Section 394 of IPC, 1860.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Public Prosecutor and perused the material available on record.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. The allegation against the present petitioner is for committing the robbery. Petitioner is behind the bars since 21.11.2025 though 15 cases have been reported against the present petitioner but 10 cases have been disposed of and in rest of the cases he is already on bail. The trial of the case will take considerable time, therefore, no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner in further custody, consequently, the bail application deserves to be allowed.

4. Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application of the petitioner.

5. On consideration of the rival submissions and material available on record and in light of submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner but without expressing any opinion on merits/demerits of the case, I am inclined to grant benefit of bail to the petitioner.

6. Consequently, the bail application under Section 483 B.N.S.S. is allowed and it is directed that the petitioner Raju Alias Falya S/o Birdharam, be released on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court with the stipulation that he shall appear before that Court on all subsequent dates of hearing till conclusion of the trial with following further conditions:-

(i) that the petitioner shall mark his presence before the SHO, Police Station Peeplu, District Tonk in every 15 days of each month till conclusion of trial.

(ii) The concerned SHO is directed to maintain a register for this purpose. 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 trial court in this regard.

(iii) The petitioner shall not repeat any offence in future.

(iii) If breach of any of the directions is reported or come to the notice of the trial court the same shall alone be a reason for learned Public Prosecutor to apply for cancellation of bail and trial court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.