[2025:RJ-JP:29630] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Misc. 2nd Bail Application No. 6570/2025 Pradeep Singh @ Pahadi Banna S/o Ganpat Singh, Aged About 24 Years, R/o Bhawta, Police Station Pisangan, District Ajmer At Present Resident Of Vikas Nagar, Police Station Murlipura, District Jaipur (Raj.). (At Present Confined In District Jail, Dausa). ----Petitioner Versus The State of Rajasthan, through PP ----Respondent Connected With S.B. Criminal Misc. 2nd Bail Application No. 6979/2025 Himanshu @ Bantu S/o Prem Prakash, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Tiwari Dharamkanta Ke Samne, Choudhary Colony Dausa, Police Station Kotwali Dausa, District Dausa (Raj.) (At Present Lodged In District Jail, Dausa). ----Petitioner Versus The State of Rajasthan, through PP ----Respondent S.B. Criminal Misc. 3rd Bail Application No. 8545/2025 Trivenishyam @ Vivek S/o Sh. Kailash, R/o Village Lotwara, Police Station Sadar Dausa, Presently Resident Of Vijaypura Road, Behind Marriage Garden, Police Station Kanota, District Jaipur (Raj.) (At Present Confined In District Jail Dausa). ----Petitioner Versus State of Rajasthan, through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. V.R. Bajwa, Sr. Advocate, assisted by Mr. Amar Kumar Ms. Simran Bharti Mr. Ved Prakash Bishnoi Mr. Chandra Shekhar Sinha For Respondent(s) : Mr. Amit Punia, PP [2025:RJ-JP:29630] (2 of 4) [CRLMB-6570/2025] Mr. Ritesh Jain HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA Order 04/08/2025 1. These bail applications have been filed by the accused petitioner under Section 483 BNSS in connection with FIR No. 633/2023 registered at Police Station Kotwali Dausa, District Dausa for offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 458, 323 & 302 IPC. 2. Heard and considered. 3. Accused petitioner-Pradeep Singh @ Pahadi was arrested on 12.01.2024. Accused petitioner-Himanshu @ Bantu was arrested on 29.12.2013 and accused petitioner- Trivenishyam @ Vivek was arrested on 06.07.2024. All the accused petitioners are in custody for last more than one year. 4. On last date, learned counsels for the petitioners submitted that the accused petitioners are in custody for a long period i.e. for more than one year, but the prosecution witnesses are not turning up for their examination before the trial Court on the fixed date. 5. In view of the submissions made by learned counsels for the accused petitioners, on that date, the Court called for the report from the trial Court i.e. Sessions Judge, Dausa, District Dausa as regards the status of the trial. [2025:RJ-JP:29630] (3 of 4) [CRLMB-6570/2025] 6. A report dated 30.07.2025 is received from the Sessions Judge, Dausa. 7. As per the report, the challan against the accused petitioner Himanshu was filed on 23.03.2024 and after the matter being committed was received in the trial Court on 01.05.2024 and charge against him was framed on 21.06.2024. Thereafter, on 41 occasions when the matter was fixed for examination of the prosecution witnesses, the witnesses did not turn up for their examination even after service of summons. The court below, in its report dated 30.07.2025, has mentioned the dates on which the prosecution witnesses have not turned up. 8. Article 21 of the Constitution of India provides for a right of speedy trial to an accused as continuous long incarceration of an accused without sufficient progress in the trial amounts to infringement of the right to life and liberty of an accused. 9. As per the report of the court below, the prosecution witnesses did not turn up for their examination on 18.07.2024, 19.07.2024, 14.08.2024, 17.08.2024, 23.08.2024, 06.09.2024, 18.09.2024, 19.09.2024, 05.10.2024, 07.10.2024, 17.10.2024, 18.10.2024, 21.10.2024, 22.10.2024, 04.11.2024, 11.11.2024, 14.11.2024, 21.11.2024, 22.11.2024, 29.11.2024, 30.11.2024, 04.12.2024, 20.12.2024, 21.12.2024, 08.01.2025, 31.01.2025, 19.02.2025, 03.03.2025, 05.03.2025, 10.03.2025, 17.03.2025, 28.03.2025, 29.03.2025, 09.04.2025, 11.04.2025, 24.04.2025, 25.04.2025, 30.04.2025, 01.05.2025, 02.06.2025, 14.07.2025 and then on 28.07.2025. [2025:RJ-JP:29630] (4 of 4) [CRLMB-6570/2025] 10. In view of the aforesaid circumstances, it would be harsh to keep continuously the accused petitioners in custody without there being any satisfactory progress in the trial and that too because on a fault on the part of prosecution, who are failing to produce the prosecution witnesses for examination. 11. Hence, this Court, without making any comment on the merit/demerits of the case, deems just and proper to enlarge the accused petitioners on bail. 12. Accordingly, these bail applications are allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioners shall be released on bail provided that they furnish a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lac Only), together with two sureties in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) to the satisfaction of the Trial Court with the stipulation that they shall appear before that Court or any Court to which the matter is transferred, on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so. (GANESH RAM MEENA),J Gaurav Srivastava /2-4