[2025:RJ-JP:30494] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 3589/2025 Hanuman S/o Bhairulal, Aged About 24 Years, R/o Tisaya, Police Station Sadar Baran, District Baran (Raj.) (At Present Confined In District Jail, Baran) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Bhim Singh For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 29/07/2025 1. The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.298/2023 registered at Police Station Sadar Baran, District Baran for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 307, 341, 323 & 34 of IPC. After completion of investigation, police filed charge-sheet in this matter for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 307, 341, 323, 326 & 34 of IPC and Section 4/25 of Arms Act. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. It is submitted that alleged incident took place in spur of the moment and petitioner did not intend to kill the deceased. It is submitted that co-accused namely- Jugal Kishore has already been granted benefit of bail by this Court. It is argued that independent eye-witness has not supported the prosecution case and has been declared hostile. [2025:RJ-JP:30494] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-3589/2025] Learned counsel contends that after completion of investigation, police filed charge-sheet in the concerned court and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. It is contended that petitioner is in custody since 05.12.2023 and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner. He submits that there is specific allegation against the petitioner of causing sharp injury on the head of the deceased and same has been opined as the cause of death. Counsel further submits that injured witnesses have supported the prosecution case. 4. I have considered the contentions. 5. Considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner and learned State counsel, especially considering the material available on record in the form of charge-sheet, as also considering the fact that there is specific allegation against the petitioner of causing sharp injury on the head of the deceased and same has been opined as the cause of death thus, looking to the nature and gravity of offence, this court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. 6. Accordingly, the instant bail application is dismissed. 7. 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 /59