[2025:RJ-JP:28671] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 3756/2025 Sunil Pateliya S/o Munna Pateliya, Aged About 20 Years, R/o Chak Badganv (Barganva), Police Thana Barganva, Dist Syopur, M.p. At Present Confined Dist Jail Banra, Dist Banra. ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Shiv Pratap Singh Rajawat Mr. Abhimanyu Singh Sandu For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP with Mr. Tapesh Agarwal, 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.43/2024 registered at Police Station Shahabad, District Baran for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 323 and 341 of IPC. After completion of investigation, police filed charge-sheet in this matter for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 341, 308, 302 and 34 of IPC. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Learned counsel submits that the alleged incident took place in spur of the moment. Counsel submits that injured of the case has been examined as PW1. In his cross examination, he has admitted [2025:RJ-JP:28671] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-3756/2025] that the deceased had already fallen down before the petitioner reached at the spot. Counsel submits that deceased passed away after ten days of the alleged incident and thus, the possibility that the deceased died on account of medical negligence cannot be ruled out. Counsel submits that even if entire prosecution case is accepted, the case would not travel beyond to Section 304 of IPC. Counsel submits that co-accused namely- Mohan and Hidiya @ Tihiya have already been granted benefit of bail by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court. It is contended that there are no criminal antecedents against the petitioner and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. Counsel contends that petitioner is in custody since 06.04.2024 and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that there is specific allegation against the petitioner of causing injury on the head of the deceased and same has been opined as cause of death. 4. I have considered the contentions. 5. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, especially considering the material available on record in the form of charge-sheet and testimony of the injured witnesses; absence of criminal antecedents against the petitioner; trial will take considerable time in its conclusion as well as looking to the period of custody, but without commenting [2025:RJ-JP:28671] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-3756/2025] anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it proper to allow the bail application. 6. 6. This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner – Sunil Pateliya S/o Munna Pateliya shall be released on bail provided he furnishes 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. 7. The observation made hereinabove is 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 pcg/63