[2025:RJ-JP:31296]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Misc. 2^nd Bail Application No. 6668/2025 Arjunlal Meena S/o Ramulal, Aged About 69 Years, R/o Village Kankatta @ Raghunandanpura, Chaksu, District Jaipur. (At Present Confined In Central Jail Jaipur).

----Petitioner Versus The State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Anshuman Saxena For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP For Complainant(s) : Mr. Chitrank Sharma HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN

Order

12/08/2025

1. This second bail application has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS, on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.487/2023 registered at Police Station Chaksu, District Jaipur City (South) for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 452, 149, 148, 147, 504, 341 & 323 of IPC. After completion of investigation, police filed charge-sheet in this matter for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 452, 149, 148, 147, 504, 341, 323, 325 & 307 of IPC.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on an earlier occasion, interim bail was preferred by the petitioner and same was granted to him by the co-ordinate bench of this court vide order dated 16.08.2024 and it was further directed that he shall surrender before the concerned jail authority on 21.08.2024. Now, this second bail application has been preferred on behalf of the petitioner.

3. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel submits that none of the injured eye-witnesses have stated that petitioner inflicted any injury on the head of the deceased and same has been attributed to co-accused- Ashok and some other general allegations have been levelled against the petitioner and co-accused- Ashok. Counsel submits that cause of death is head injury. It is contended that trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. Counsel contends that petitioner is in custody since 18.12.2023 and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose.

4. Learned Public Prosecutor assisted by learned counsel for the complainant vehemently oppose the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner.

5. I have considered the contentions.

6. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner, especially considering the statement of injured eye-witnesses as well as the complainant, wherein no specific overt act has been assigned to the petitioner with regard to allegation of causing injury on the head of the deceased, as also considering the fact that allegation of causing head injury has been assigned to co-accused- Ashok and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion as well as looking to the custody period, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it proper to allow this second bail application.

7. This second bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner - Arjunlal Meena S/o Ramulal, shall be released on bail provided, he shall furnish a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court with the stipulation that he shall appear before that Court and any court to which the matter is transferred, on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.

8. The observations made hereinabove are only for decision of the instant bail application and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner.

(ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J CHARU SONI /210