[2025:RJ-JP:22164] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Second Bail Application No. 6401/2025 1. Bhairu Lal S/o Hariprasad, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Negadiya, Tehsil Devli, Distt. Tonk 2. Babulal S/o Hariprasad, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Negadiya, Tehsil Devli, Distt. Tonk (At Present Accused- Petitioners Are Confined In Distt. Jail Tonk) ----Petitioners Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent Connected With S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Second Bail Application No. 4278/2025 Mahendra S/o Shankar, Aged About 49 Years, R/o Thagra Colony, Deoli, Village, Presently Negdiya, P.s. Deoli, District Tonk. (At Present Accused Is Confined In Judicial Custody At District Jail, Tonk) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Third Bail Application No. 6402/2025 Hariprasad @ Hari Lal S/o Kesara, Aged About 61 Years, R/o Negadiya, Tehsil Devli, Distt. Tonk (At Present Accused- Petitioners Are Confined In Distt. Jail Tonk) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Second Bail Application No. 6750/2025 Dharamraj S/o Babulal, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Ambapura Colony, Dolta Mode, Devli At Present Resident Of Nagediya, Police Devli, District Tonk (Raj.) (At Present Confined In District Jail, Tonk (Raj.) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Second Bail Application No. 6751/2025 Kailashi Devi W/o Lalchand, Aged About 62 Years, R/o Nagediya, [2025:RJ-JP:22164] (2 of 4) [CRLMB-6401/2025] Thana Devli, District Tonk. (Presently Confined In District Jail Tonk, District Tonk). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vijendra Yadav Mr. Farooq Ahmed Mr. Rama Kant Sharma Mr. Shiv Pratap Singh Rajawat For Respondent(s) For Complainant(s) : : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP Mr. Narayan Singh Chaudhary with Ms. Sarika Choudhary HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 27/05/2025 1. These bail applications have been filed under Section 483 of BNSS on behalf of the petitioners, who have been arrested in connection with FIR No. 218/2024 registered at Police Station Devli, District Tonk (Rajasthan) for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 341 & 323 of IPC. After completion of investigation, police filed charge-sheet in this matter for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 302, 147, 148 & 149 of IPC. 2. The previous bail applications filed on behalf of the petitioners were dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to renew the prayer for bail after recording testimony of eye-witnesses as well as medical expert who conducted the post-mortem of the deceased. Now, all the aforementioned witnesses have been examined during the course of trial thus, present bail applications have been preferred. [2025:RJ-JP:22164] (3 of 4) [CRLMB-6401/2025] 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. It is contended that all eight eye-witnesses have been examined during the course of trial wherein they have not supported the prosecution case and have been declared hostile. Counsel submit that at present, there are no criminal antecedents against the petitioners and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. Petitioners are in custody since their date of arrest and further custody of the petitioners would not serve any fruitful purpose. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor assisted by learned counsel for the complainant vehemently opposes the submissions made by counsel for the petitioners. Counsel for the complainant submits that it is apparent from the testimony of the medical expert that deceased expired on account of injuries caused by the accused persons. However, they failed to controvert the fact that all eight eye-witnesses have not supported the prosecution case and they have been declared hostile. 5. I have considered the contentions. 6. 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 fact that all eight eye-witnesses have not supported the prosecution case and they have been declared hostile, so also considering the fact that at present, there are no criminal antecedents against the petitioners and there is bleak chance of culmination of trial in near future as well as looking to the custody period, but without [2025:RJ-JP:22164] (4 of 4) [CRLMB-6401/2025] commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it fit and proper to allow these bail applications. 7. Accordingly, these second and third bail applications are allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioners -(1) Bhairu Lal S/o Hariprasad, (2) Babulal S/o Hariprasad, (3) Mahendra S/o Shankar, (4) Hariprasad @ Hari Lal S/o Kesara, (5) Dharamraj S/o Babulal and (6) Kailashi Devi W/o Lalchand shall be released on bail provided each of them 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 they 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. 8. 8. The observation made hereinabove is only for decision of the instant bail applications and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J LALIT MOHAN /32-36