[2026:RJ-JP:2603]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Misc. 2nd Bail Application No. 15390/2025 Kishan Lal S/o Sukhram @ Sukka, Aged About 50 Years, R/o Vil- lage-Khonkhar, P.s. Kherli, District Alwar (Rajasthan) (Presently In District Jail, Alwar, Dist. Alwar).

----Petitioner Versus State of Rajasthan, through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Anupam Sharma Mr. Harshit Parashar For Respondent(s) : Ms. Aarti Sharma, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA

Order

21/01/2026

1. This second bail application has been filed by the petitioner under Section 483 of BNSS in connection with FIR No.145/2024 registered at Police Station Kherli, District Alwar for the offences punishable u/S 143, 323, 341, 307 & 504 IPC.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that even after re- peated summons by the trial Court and bailable warrants, the prosecution witnesses are not turning up for their examination. He also submits that the accused petitioner is in custody since 28.03.2024 and till date only 4 out of total 26 prosecution wit- 3. Learned counsel for the accused petitioner also submits that the accused petitioner has a right of speedy trial as provided un- der Article 21 of the Constitution of India but due to non-appear-

ance of the prosecution witnesses for their examination, the ac- cused petitioner is languishing in jail for about two years. It is also submitted by him that the co-accused Bachan Singh Bairwa have already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 10.11.2025 on the ground of delay in trial and the case of the present accused petitioner is in no manner distinguishable from the case of the aforesaid co-accused.

3. Learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the bail ap- plication and submitted that there are specific allegation against the accused petitioner of inflicting injury to the deceased.

4. Considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the accused petitioner as well as learned Public Prosecutor and also perused the material made available on record so also the order dated 10.11.2025 passed in the case of co-accused Bachan Singh Bairwa, whereby he was enlarged on bail.

5. While considering the bail application of Bachan Singh Bairwa, learned Public Prosecutor stated that the prosecution wit- nesses are not available at their residence. Learned counsel for the complainant, at that time, also stated that they will get exam-

ine the prosecution witnesses on the next date.

6. Taking into consideration the material facts regarding delay in trial, this Court ordered to enlarge the co-accused Bachan Singh Bairwa on bail observing that "accused petitioner is in custody since 23.06.2024 and the prosecution witnesses are not turning up for evidence and till date only two out of total 26 prosecution 7. On going through the contents of the FIR as well as the statements of the prosecution witnesses examined so far, the case of the present accused petitioner as regards the factual aspects is in no manner distinguishable from the case of the co-accused Bachan Singh Bairwa, who has already been enlarged on bail. Hence this Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits and demerits of the case, deems it just and proper to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

8. Accordingly, this bail application is allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner shall be released on bail provided that he furnishes personal bonds in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lac Only) each, together with two sureties in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only)(each) to the satisfaction of the Trial Court with the stipulation that he shall appear before that Court or any Court to which the matter is transferred, on all sub-

sequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.

(GANESH RAM MEENA),J Gaurav Srivastava /5