[2026:RJ-JD:9678]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 1516/2026 Heera Bharati S/o Sh Lahar Bharati, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Dantlawas, Police Station Jaswantpura, District Jalore. (At Present Lodged In Sub Jail Bhimmal)

----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Jamtaram Patel.

For Respondent(s) : Mr. Surendra Bishnoi, PP.

Mr. SK Sainee for complainant.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUKESH RAJPUROHIT

Order

23/02/2026 The instant second application for bail under Section 483 of BNSS (439 of Cr.P.C.) has been filed by the petitioner, who has been arrested in the present matter. The requisite details of the matter are tabulated herein below:

The 1^st bail application filed on behalf of petitioner i.e. S.B.

Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.14339/2025 was dismissed vide order dated 25.11.2025 passed by this Court with the liberty to the petitioner to file fresh bail application after recording the statement of Injured (Mitha Lal). After rejection of first bail application, the statement of injured has been recorded. Hence, this second application for bail has been filed.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is contended that as per the statement of the injured–Mitha Lal (PW-2), the specific allegation of inflicting lathi blows on the head is attributed to Jara Ram. The injured has stated that he sustained injuries and later regained consciousness during treatment at Palanpur Hospital.

It is further submitted that the injured witness has admitted in his cross-examination that he cannot state who assaulted him after the initial incident, who took him to the hospital or by what means he was transported. He further submits that the injured has further admitted before the learned trial Court that accused Hira Bharati was not carrying any weapon. Thus, even as per the prosecution’s own witness, no specific overt act is attributed to the present petitioner and the allegations against him remain vague and unsubstantiated.

The relevant portion of the statement of the injured reads as follows:–

Þtsjkjke us ejss flj ij rkcMrksM+ ykBh ls okj fd;s ftlls eSa tehu ij csgks'k gksdj fxj x;kA fQj eq>s xkao okys tloariqjk vLirky ysdj x;s Fks tgka ls vkxs ikyuiqj vLirky ysdj x;sA eq>s ikyuiqj esa 2&3 fnu ckn gks'k vk;k FkkA esjs flj] da/ks] gkFk ij pksVsa vk;h FkhA esjk cka;k gkFk VVw x;k FkkA esjs dku o lhus ij pksVs vk;h FkhA fQj ckn esa eSaus lquk fd ejss HkkbZ tks/kkjke us fjiksVZ dh FkhA iqfyl us esjs c;ku ?kVuk ds 1 ekg 10 fnu ckn 17 rkjh[k dks fy;s FksA esjks tloariqjk] ikyuiqj o tkyksj esa efsMdy eqvk;uk gqvk FkkA ;g dguk lgh gS fd esjs flj esa ykBjh dh pksV yxrs gh eSa ekSds ij csgks'k gks x;k Fkk blfy, eSa ugha crk ldrk fd mlds ckn ejss lkFk fdUgksaus ekjihV dh o dkSu eq>s gkWfLiVy ysdj x;s o fdl lk/ku ls ysdj x;sA ;g dguk lgh gS fd eSa csgks'k gksus ds dkj.k ?kVuk ds ckn 3 fnuksa rd eSa dgka&dgka x;k] fdlus esjk bykt fd;k fdl lk/ku ls ysdj x;s eSa ugha crk ldrkA ;g dguk lgh gS fd eqyfte ghjk Hkkjrh ds gkFk esa dksbZ gfFk;kj ugha FkkA ß Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the co-accused Jara Ram have already been enlarged on bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 08.01.2025, passed in S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 12989/2024 respectively.

Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner is in custody since 19.11.2025 and the trial of the case will take sufficiently long time, therefore, the benefit of bail may be granted to the accused-petitioner.

Per contra, learned counsel for the complaina