[2026:RJ-JD:4513]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 1093/2026 Anil Kumar S/o Abharam Vishnoi, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Dadusun, P.s. Sarwana, Dist. Jalore,raj. (Lodged In Central Jail, Udaipur)

----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Dr. Prathistha Dave.

For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sameer Pareek, P.P.

HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE NUPUR BHATI

Order

23/01/2026

1. The instant 2^nd bail application has been filed by the petitioner under Section 483 BNSS, who has been arrested in connection with the FIR No.34/2025 dated 09.02.2025, registered at Police Station Bhupalpura, District Udaipur, for the offences under Sections 108 & 3 (5) of BNS, 2023.

2. The first bail application of the petitioner was rejected vide order dated 07.05.2025 in SBCRLMB No.4624/2025, however, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is change in the circumstances, as the Court Statements of Hostel Warden – Asha Kanwar (PW4), Roommate of the deceased – Nikita (PW5) have been recorded, the present 2^nd bail application has been preferred by the petitioner.

3. The prosecution case, as emerging from the FIR and the material placed on record, is that the informant’s daughter - ‘K’, a final-year B.Sc. Nursing student, was residing in a PG accommodation at Udaipur, where on 22.01.2025 she was found dead, allegedly having committed suicide by hanging. It is alleged that a suicide note recovered during the investigation attributes the cause of the deceased taking the extreme step to continuous harassment and mental cruelty by the present accused and others, who are stated to have abetted the commission of suicide. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that none of the witnesses i.e. Hostel Warden – Asha Kanwar (PW4), Roommate of the deceased – Nikita (PW5), in their Court Statements, have alleged any act of instigation on the part of the petitioner that could have driven the deceased to commit suicide. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that although the deceased has named the petitioner in the suicide note, the mere naming of the petitioner does not disclose any specific act of instigation or abetment. She submits that in the charge-sheet there is no evidence to show that the petitioner instigated or actively provoked the deceased to commit the suicide. While drawing the attention of the Court towards the chats, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there are direct chats between the deceased and the co-accused Mayur the night before she committed the suicide i.e. 21.01.2025 and there is no chat placed on record in the charge-sheet between the petitioner and the deceased. She submits that other than the suicide note there is no other evidence placed on record, which indicates that the petitioner has instigated the deceased to commit the suicide. She also submits that there are number of financial transactions between Mayur and the deceased, who has been enlarged on bail by the Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 13.10.2025 passed in SBCRLMB No.8174/2025. She submits that the petitioner is in custody since 09.02.2025 and he was also undergoing the B.Sc. Nursing Course at the time when the deceased was also pursuing the same course, therefore, the petitioner deserves to be enlarged on bail.

5. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the bail application; however, he is not in a position to refute that the Court Statements of Hostel Warden Asha Kanwar (PW-4) and the roommate of the deceased, Nikita (PW-5), do not contain any allegations against the petitioner, and further is also not in a position to refute the fact that the co-accused Mayur and the deceased were chatting with each other on the night and the day before the incident, and that there is no chatting placed on record in the charge-sheet between the petitioner and the deceased and further that there is no evidence to show that the petitioner instigated or actually provoked t