[2025:RJ-JP:2725] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 3256/2024 Kaluram @ Kalu S/o Heeralal, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Enchare, Police Station Chauth Ka Barwada, District Sawai Madhopur. (At Present In District Jail, Sawai Madhopur). ----Petitioner Versus The State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Dr. Mahesh Shamra For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rajendra Singh Shekhawat, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR Order 20/01/2025 The instant bail application has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. on behalf of accused-petitioner. The petitioner has been arrested in connection with FIR No. 238/2023 registered at Police Station Chauth Ka Barwada, District Sawaimadhopur for the offence(s) under Sections 341, 323, 504, 302, 120-B, 147, 148 and 149 of IPC. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the accused- petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. It is argued that petitioner is behind the bar since 16.10.2023. learned counsel further submits that there is a long list of 23 prosecution witnesses out of which only 11 witnesses have been examined till yet and further trial of the case will take considerable time. It is further argued that the material witness PW-3 Sita Ram is not reliable and trustworthy, as he has improved his version. [2025:RJ-JP:2725] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-3256/2024] The other witness PW-4 Manraj is hearsay witness, PW-5 Girrraj and PW-6 Ramswaroop in their examination in chief stated that they saw accused-petitioner running away from the place of occurrence and they have not seen the incident. The other witness PW-8 Kanhaiya Lal have turned hostile and not supported the prosecution story. It is also contended that apart from the head injury, no other injury at the vital part of the injured. The recovery of weapon was affected from the open place, therefore, the benefit of bail may be granted to the accused-petitioner. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposes the bail application. Heard and perused the material available on record. Considering the arguments advanced by the counsel for the parties and looking to the fact that eye-witness PW-3 Sita Ram in his statement has deposed against the petitioner and named the petitioner as one of the assailant, it is not apposite for the court to minutely examine the version of the witnesses by going into the cross-examination, therefore, I am not inclined to enlarge the accused-petitioner on bail, therefore his bail application is hereby dismissed. (PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J ashu /78