[2025:RJ-JP:17379] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 197/2025 IN S.B. Criminal Misc. Third Bail Application No.9167/2024 Billa Singh S/o Shri Kikar Singh, R/o Daulewala, Tehsil Dharamkot, Police Station Kot Ishekha, District Moga, Punjab. (At Present In Central Jail, Ajmer). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Shyam Bihari Gautam For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shriram Dhakad, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 24/04/2025 The instant application under Section 528 of BNSS has been filed on behalf of the petitioner seeking modification/correction in the order dated 16.04.2025 passed in S.B. Criminal Misc. Third Bail Application No.9167/2024 by this court. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that at the time of filing of the bail application, since co-accused Gurupreet was confined in jail in State of Punjab, charge against him could not be framed at trial and therefore, till filing of this bail application, trial was not started and statement of seizure officer could not be recorded but during pendency of this bail application, trial has started and statement of the seizure officer has been recorded. However, inadvertently, in the order dated 16.04.2025, it has [2025:RJ-JP:17379] (2 of 2) [CRLMA-197/2025] wrongly been recorded that trial has not commenced but as stated above, during pendency of the bail application, charges have been framed against the co-accused and trial has started recently. Statement of Seizure Officer has also been recorded at trial but most of the prosecution witnesses are yet to be examined. He thus, prays for correction/rectification of this factual aspect in the order dated 16.04.2025. Heard. Perused the material available on record. The petitioner is in custody since 09.04.2023 and looking to the period of incarceration which is more than two years and snail’s pace of trial, facility of bail was granted to him. As per the material available on file, most of the prosecution witnesses are yet to be examined as trial has commenced recently. In view of above submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner, the prayer for correction/rectification in the order to the extent of aforesaid factual position, is accepted. The submission of the petitioner’s counsel that trial has not yet commenced, be replaced and read as “most of the prosecution witnesses are yet to be examined as trial has commenced recently”. The application is allowed accordingly. This application may be treated part and parcel of the order dated 16.04.2025. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J GAUTAM JAIN /257