##PAGE1##

[2026:RJ-JP:20785]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Second Bail Application No.

7099/2026

Pankaj S/o Harishchandra, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Ramnagar,

Police Station Kumher, District Deeg. (Presently In Judicial

Custody At District Jail, Deeg)

----Petitioner

Versus

State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor

----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Jay Vardhan Joshi

For Respondent(s) : Mr. Jaiprakash Tiwari, PP

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAMIL KUMAR MATHUR

Order

18/05/2026

1. The petitioner has filed this second bail application under

Section 483 of BNSS in FIR No.515/2025 registered at Police

Station Kumher, District Deeg for offences under Sections 189(2)

and 103(1) of BNS, 2023.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned

Public Prosecutor and perused the material available on record.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has

falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that the

earlier bail application preferred by the petitioner was dismissed

solely on the ground that the case was based on circumstantial

evidence and that the statements of witnesses Ramu and

Chetram, recorded during the course of investigation, clearly

established the presence of the petitioner at the scene of

occurrence as a “last seen”. However, Ramu and Chetram have

(Uploaded on 20/05/2026 at 07:52:36 AM)

(Downloaded on 20/05/2026 at 11:41:00 PM)

[2026:RJ-JP:20785] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-7099/2026]

since been examined before the trial Court as PW-6 and PW-8

respectively, and both have not supported the prosecution story

and have turned hostile. It is further submitted that, in the facts

of the present case, Gopal Singh (PW-3), as well as other

witnesses, namely PW-1 Uday Singh, PW-2 Rajendra Meena, PW-4

Pooja, PW-5 Dohadi and PW-7 Bhagwan Singh, have also not

supported the prosecution case and have turned hostile. Co-

accused Prahlad Singh @ Pintu has already been enlarged on bail

by this Court vide order dated 28.04.2026. The petitioner has

been behind bars since 26.08.2025. Though he has two criminal

antecedents of a different nature, he has been granted bail in both

the said cases. The trial of the case will take considerable time,

therefore, no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the

petitioner in further custody, consequently, the bail application of

the petitioner may be allowed.

4. Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail

application.

5. On consideration of the rival submissions and material

available on record and in the light of submissions made by

learned counsel for the petitioner but without expressing any

opinion on merits/demerits of the case, I am inclined to grant

benefit of bail to the petitioner.

6. Consequently, the second bail applications under Section 483

B.N.S.S. are allowed and it is directed that the petitioner Pankaj

S/o Harishchandra, be released on bail provided he furnishes a

personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties in the

sum of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial

(Uploaded on 20/05/2026 at 07:52:36 AM)

(Downloaded on 20/05/2026 at 11:41:00 PM)

[2026:RJ-JP:20785] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-7099/2026]

court with the stipulation that each of he shall appear before that

Court on all subsequent dates of hearing till conclusion of the trial.

(PRAMIL KUMAR MATHUR),J

Arun/90

(Uploaded on 20/05/2026 at 07:52:36 AM)

(Downloaded on 20/05/2026 at 11:41:00 PM)