[2025:RJ-JP:24369] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous IInd Bail Application No. 6994/2025 Mukat Singh @ Udham Singh S/o Maharaj Singh, R/o Gadhi Maharawar, Police Station Sadar Bayana, District Bharatpur. (At Present Confined In Central Jail Sewar, District Bharatpur). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Yogesh Singhal For Respondent(s) For Complainant(s) : : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP Mr. Gordhan Singh Fauzdar HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 03/07/2025 1. The instant second bail application has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS, on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No. 807/2024 registered at police station Mathuragate, District Bharatpur, (Raj.) for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1) and 61(2)(a) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, (in short ‘BNS’) 2023. After completion of investigation, police filed charge-sheet in this matter. 2. The first bail application filed on behalf of the petitioner was dismissed by this court vide order dated 10.01.2025. Now, this second bail application has been preferred. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. It is submitted that after rejection of first bail application of the petitioner, some material witnesses including wife of the deceased have been examined during the course of trial. Counsel submits that it appears from their testimony that false case has been instituted against the petitioner. It is submitted that no evidence is available on record to [2025:RJ-JP:24369] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-6994/2025] establish the fact that body recovered is of deceased- Goverdhan Singh as neither the body was in a state to be identified nor any DNA examination has been conducted in this matter as prosecution failed to collect samples from the family members of the deceased. Counsel contends that petitioner is in custody since 08.10.2024 and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 4. Learned State counsel assisted by learned counsel for the complainant vehemently opposes the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner. It is submitted that deceased was lastly seen in the company of the petitioner and same is evident from the CCTV footage collected during the course of investigation. It is further submitted that blood stained stone has also been recovered at the instance of the petitioner and same was used in commission of murder of the deceased. State counsel further submits that earlier bail application of the petitioner was rejected on merits and as such there is no substantial change in circumstances. 5. After considering the submissions made by counsel for the parties as also looking to the material available on record and the fact that first bail application of the petitioner was dismissed on merits and as such, there is no substantial change in circumstances thus, I do not find any good ground to change my earlier view. 6. Accordingly, the instant second criminal misc. bail application filed by the petitioner is hereby dismissed. 7. However, considering the period of incarceration, trial court is directed to expedite the trial. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J ashu /279