[2025:RJ-JP:47543]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 3^rd Bail Application No. 9611/2025 Raju @ Rajmal Gurjar S/o Madhuram, Aged About 33 Years, Resident of Bahadurpura, At Present Indra Colony, Ward No. 04, Near Paani Ki Tanki, Vijay Nagar, District Ajmer, (Raj.) (Presently Confined In Central Jail Ajmer)

----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p.

----Respondent Connected With S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 3^rd Bail Application No. 14471/2025 Bheru Lal Gurjar S/o Hagama, Aged About 36 Years, Resident Of Jaisinghpura, Vijay Nagar, (At Present In Central Jail, Ajmer)

----Petitioner Versus The State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Navdeep Singh, Adv.

For Respondent(s) : Mr. ND Dhakar, PP with Mr. MS Shekhawat, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN

Order

24/11/2025

1. These bail applications have been filed on behalf of the accused-petitioners who are in custody since 13.06.2022, in connection with FIR No.246/2022 Police Station Vijay Nagar, Ajmer for offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149 & 302 of IPC. After completion of investigation, police has filed charge-

sheet in this matter before the court concerned.

2. Counsel for the petitioners submits that the second bail applications filed by the petitioners were dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 09.04.2025 by this Court with the specific direction to the trial court to conduct the trial in this matter on day-to-day basis and conclude the same on or before 31.10.2025. Counsel submits that despite specific direction, the trial is still pending for conclusion. Thus, these bail applications have been preferred on behalf of the petitioners.

3. It is contended by learned counsel for the accused petitioners that the accused petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel submits that nothing has come on record which shows involvement of the accused petitioners in the alleged crime. It is also contended that petitioners are in custody since 13.06.2022 and as such, till date, they have suffered incarceration of nearly three years and five months. He contends that trial is going at a snail’s pace as till date only 27 witnesses have been examined out of 31 cited witnesses. Conclusion of trial will take considerable time. He also contends that this delay occurring in conclusion of trial is seriously violating the fundamental right of the speedy trial of the petitioner as guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The period of custody is always relevant consideration for grant of bail. When a trial get prolonged, it is not open for the prosecution to oppose bail of the accused on the ground that the charges are very serious.

4. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposes the prayer of bail. It is submitted that looking to gravity of offence and evidence so far come on record, the petitioners do not deserve indulgence of bail. He, thus, crave dismissal of these bail applications.

5. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.

6. Admittedly, the petitioners are in custody since 22.06.2022 and thus, they have served incarceration of nearly three years and five months. Further, while dismissing the second bail applications as withdrawn, this Court issued specific direction to the trial court to conclude the trial on or before 31.10.2025, but yet the trial has not been concluded and till date only 27 witnesses, out of 31 cited witnesses, have been examined and thus, trial will take long time in its conclusion. The delay occurring in conclusion of trial is seriously violating the fundamental right of the speedy trial of the petitioners as guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

7. The personal liberty is a priceless treasure for a human being. It is basically a natural right. No one would like to lose his liberty. People from centuries have fought for liberty, for absence of l