The court ruled favorably on bail applications due to completion of investigation and absence of ongoing necessity for detention, underscoring procedural fairness in criminal proceedings.

Order :

1. These bail applications under Section 483 of BNSS is filed by the applicants-accused Smt Sitadevi Wife Of Sanwara, Smt. Urmila Devi Wife Of Dharmichand, Bhagwan @ Bhagchand S/o Jagannath, Dhanraj @ Dhanna S/o Gyarsilal, Dharmichand S/o Gyarsilal, Hemraj @ Tarachand @ Taru S/o Gyarsilal, Sonu S/o Pappu, Raju S/o Sukhlal, Bholu S/o Ratanlal, seeking bail in respect of a criminal case registered as FIR No.039/2025 dated 11.02.2025 registered at P.S. Sarwad, District - Ajmer, for the offence under Sections 190 , 191(2), 109(1) of BNS.

2. During course of argument, learned counsel offers to withdraw bail application of Dharmichand S/o Gyarsilal, and Hemraj @ Tarachand @ Taru S/o Gyarsilal.

3. Hence, the bail application filed on behalf of Dharmichand S/o Gyarsilal, and Hemraj @ Tarachand @ Taru S/o Gyarsilal are dismissed as withdrawn.

4. Thus, we are considering bail applications with respect to Smt Sitadevi Wife Of Sanwara, Smt. Urmila Devi Wife Of Dharmichand, Bhagwan @ Bhagchand S/o Jagannath, Dhanraj @ Dhanna S/o Gyarsilal, Sonu S/o Pappu, Raju S/o Sukhlal, Bholu S/o Ratanlal.

5. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the matter and the investigation against him is complete and they are no more required in investigation. He further submits that there are no chance of fleeing of applicants accused from the jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court. The applicants do not have any criminal antecedents. He also submits that the applicant undertakes not to repeat offence and cooperate with investigation/trial, which will take time.

6. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that for incident of 10.02.2025 a report under Sections 190, 191(2), 109(1) of BNS is registered by Ramdev (brother of injured) wherein he mentioned that his brother Behru who committed murder of son of Hemraj @ Tarachand @ Taru (petitioner accused) in the year 2019 and was in judicial custody and was recently released on bail, was assaulted on 10.02.2025. He further submitted that the content of FIR is sufficient to show that there was animosity between the parties and due to animosity several persons were named in FIR and it is a case of over implication. He further submitted that as per facts mentioned in report, the complainant is not an eye-witness rather he was informed by Kalu Bheel Kotwal. He further submitted that there are general and omnibus allegations of assault by accused but no specific attribution is made in the report. He further submitted that during investigation the statement of witnesses were recorded and there is no eye- witness to the incident. He further referred CCTV footage collected by police and submitted that as per the analysis the allegation of assault is upon Tarachand @ Taru and Dharmichand for assaulting with stick but not upon any other person. He also submitted that other persons were identified as standing at the crime scene but they have not participated in the incident. He also submitted that after the incident injured was admitted in JLN Hospital, Ajmer but later, considering that no one was there to take care of him (destitute) he was shifted in Apna Ghar, Ajmer wherein he died on 09.03.2025. He further submitted that circumstances itself indicate that it was a case of negligence in treatment of deceased as complainant or relatives of deceased have not made efforts for treatment of complainant after alleged injury sustained on 10.02.2025. He further submitted that one of the accused Raju is not named in FIR and there is no co-relation between injuries and death. He further submitted that he has already not pressed the bail application of Dharmichand, Hemraj @ Tarachand @ Taru who were allegedly found involved in the incident of assault from CCTV footage. He further submit