[2025:RJ-JP:20895] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 5627/2025 Sushil @ Tinnu S/o Shri Samundra Prasad, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Nai Aabadi, Village Bapi, Police Station Sainthal, District Dausa (Raj.). (At Present Confined In Special Jail, Shalyawas, District Dausa). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Anshuman Saxena For Respondent(s) For Complainant : Mr. Rajendra Singh Shekhawat, PP Mr. Vaibhav Pancholy HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAMIL KUMAR MATHUR Order 19/05/2025 1. The petitioner has preferred this bail application under Section 483 of BNSS in FIR No.0030/2023 registered at Police Station-Sainthal, District-Dausa for the offences under Sections 143, 341, 323, 364 and 302 of IPC. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Public Prosecutor as well as counsel for the complainant and perused the material available on record. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that out of 49 witnesses 31 witnesses have been examined and no material evidence was adduced by the prosecution against him during the trial. He further submits that the co-accused-Vinod Kumar has been granted bail by the Co-ordinate Bench of this [2025:RJ-JP:20895] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-5627/2025] Court and cross cases are there in which injuries have been attributed to the accused-petitioner. The petitioner is behind the Bar since 10.03.2023 i.e. more than two years. The trial of the case may take considerable time, hence the bail application of the petitioner may be allowed. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application and stated that the there is no recovery from the co- accused-Vinod Kumar and in the present case, there is recovery of Lathi from the present petitioner, therefore, the petitioner is not entitled for the benefit of bail, hence his bail application may be rejected. 5. On consideration of the rival submission and material available on record and deliberating all the facts and circumstances of the case, especially the fact that there is recovery of Lathi on the part of the petitioner and in backdrop of incriminating statements made by the material witnesses-PW.2- Nahar Singh, PW.3-Moti Singh and PW.4-Virendar but without expressing any opinion on the merits/demerits of the case, I am not inclined to grant benefit of bail to the petitioner. 6. Accordingly, the bail application under Section 483 B.N.S.S. is dismissed. (PRAMIL KUMAR MATHUR),J Sunita/183