[2025:RJ-JP:29185] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous IVth Bail Application No. 5959/2025 Naveen S/o Sartaj Singh, R/o Dhani Banta Wali, Tan Daulatsinghpura, Police Station Neemrana, District Alwar, Raj. (Presently Confined In Central Jail At Alwar). ----Accused-Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Manan Sharma for Mr. Mahendra Shandilya For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vivek Choudhary, PP Mr. Mohit Balwada with Mr. Aditya Raj and Mr. Sunil Shekhawat HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL Order 31/07/2025 Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted certified copies of the statements of the prosecution witnesses recorded so far as also the order-sheets of the learned trial Court, an advance copy whereof has already been supplied to the learned Public Prosecutor as well as to the learned counsel for the complainant, which are taken on record. The present fourth bail application has been filed under Section 483 B.N.S.S. (previously 439 Cr.P.C.). The petitioner has been arrested in connection with FIR No.0577/2019 registered at Police Station Neemrana, District Bhiwadi (Alwar) for the offence under Sections 147, 148, 149, 450, 307, 302, 323 and 341 IPC. [2025:RJ-JP:29185] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-5959/2025] Prayer for grant on bail has been renewed on the ground of long incarceration and parity. Learned counsel for the petitioner, inviting attention of this Court towards the order dated 10.02.2025 passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Criminal Appeal No.653/2025 (arising out of SLP (Criminal) No.14623/2024): Sandeep Kumar Yadav @ Fakru vs. State of Rajasthan, would submit that the petitioner was granted indulgence of bail on the ground of long incarceration inasmuch as he was in custody since 30.10.2019 and by that time, out of total 25 prosecution witnesses, only 8 were examined. He submits that the petitioner is also in custody since 30.10.2019 and till date, only 11 prosecution witnesses have been examined. He, therefore, prays for benefit of bail. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor assisted by the learned counsel for the complainant would submit that the petitioner is not entitled for bail either on parity or long incarceration. He submits that the petitioner was extended benefit of interim bail for a period of one week on account of death of his grandmother by this Court vide order dated 25.07.2022 alongwith his father; but, while, his father surrendered back in time, the petitioner absconded and indulged in another offence whereupon, an FIR No.681 dated 16.11.2023 was registered by the complainant at the Police Station Neemrana, District Kotputli, Behror wherein, he was arrested and at present he is in judicial custody. He submits that after investigation, the police filed charge-sheet against the petitioner and other co-accused persons under Sections 323, 341, 365, 379, 307, 120-B, 325 and 367 IPC. He submits that in view thereof, it does not lie in the mouth of the petitioner to contend [2025:RJ-JP:29185] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-5959/2025] that he is entitled for benefit of bail on parity with the co-accused Sandeep Kumar Yadav @ Fakru. He, therefore, prays for dismissal of the bail application. Heard. Considered. Indisputably, misusing the liberty of interim bail granted by this Court vide order dated 25.07.2022 for a period of one week on account of death of his grandmother, the petitioner did not surrender back and remaining absconded for a period of one year and almost four months, he indulged in the offence, amongst others, of an attempt to murder and kidnapping of the son of the complainant in which, the police after investigation filed the charge-sheet and he is in judicial custody. In these circumstances, it cannot be said that case of the petitioner is at par with the case of the co-accused-Sandeep Kumar Yadav @ Fakru. In the conspectus of aforesaid facts and looking to the gravity of allegations against the petitioner, he does not deserve indulgence of bail. Resultantly, this present bail application is dismissed. However, looking to the period of incarceration, the learned trial Court is requested to expedite trial. (MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL),J DIKSHA /107