[2025:RJ-JP:18716] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Third Bail Application No. 4516/2025 Dharmendra Kumar @paylet S/o Shivdayal, R/o Palanpur, Police Station Sadar Hindaun, District Karauli (Raj.) ( At Present Confined In Sub Jail Hindaun City Karauli) ----Petitioner Versus The State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Asgar Khan For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shriram Dhakad, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 05/05/2025 1. The third bail application has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS, on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.322/2022 registered at Police Station Sadar Hindaun, District Karauli (Raj.) for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 341, 504, 307 & 302 of IPC. Later on, police filed charge-sheet in this matter for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 341, 504 & 302 of IPC and Section 3/25 of Arms Act. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that first bail application of the petitioner was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 05.12.2023 with liberty to renew the prayer of bail after recording testimony of witnesses namely- Sher Singh, Dhara Singh & Dheeraj @ Dheera Singh. It is submitted that second bail application was preferred on behalf of the petitioner when the [2025:RJ-JP:18716] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-4516/2025] aforesaid witnesses were examined however, same was again dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 05.09.2024 with liberty to renew the prayer of bail after recording testimony of eye- witnesses namely- Guddi, Dharam Singh, Shivraj, Deendayal, Sher Singh, Amrit, Raghuveer, Shivnarayan & Kallu Ram. Now, except Deendayal & Raghuveer, all other witnesses have been examined during the course of trial and aforesaid two witnesses have been dropped by the prosecution. Thus, this third bail application has been preferred. 3. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel submits that witnesses namely Shersingh s/o Jaisingh, Shivnarayan, Amrit & Kallu Ram have not supported the prosecution case and have been declared hostile. Counsel submits that till date, only 17 witnesses have been examined out of 28 cited prosecution witnesses thus, there is bleak chance of culmination of trial in near future. Petitioner is in custody since 10.06.2022 and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 4. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposes the bail application and submits that there is specific allegation against the petitioner of causing firearm injury on the person of the deceased. He submits that according to the post-mortem report, cause of death is multiple firearm injuries. Counsel further submits that mere fact that some of the witnesses have not supported the prosecution case would not be enough for the [2025:RJ-JP:18716] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-4516/2025] petitioner to avail the benefit of bail when other witnesses have deposed against him. 5. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced at bar, material made available on record in the form of charge-sheet including testimony of the witnesses, further considering the role attributed to the petitioner in the charge-sheet as well as in the testimony of the witnesses who were present at the place of incident, as also considering the fact that cause of death is firearm injury and same has been recovered at the instance of the petitioner thus, looking to the gravity and nature of the offence, I do not find it a fit case to enlarge the petitioner on bail. 6. Accordingly, this third bail application stands dismissed. 7. Considering the period of incarceration, learned trial Court is directed to conduct the trial on day-to-day basis and shall make all endeavour to conclude the trial on or before 31.12.2025. 8. The observations 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 LALIT MOHAN /34