HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 14781/2025 Vinod Mahawar @ Pramod S/o Shri Pappu Kumar, Aged About 23 Years, R/o At Tullapura Kota Present Rented Premise At Sonu Bana Ke Makaan, Shiv Mandir Ke Pass, Bada Sogeriya, Police Station Railway Colony, Kota City, District Kota (Raj.) (At Presently Confined In District Jail Kota). ----Petitioner Versus The State of Rajasthan, through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr.Pawan Kumar Verma For Respondent(s) : Mr.Vivek Choudhary, PP JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 25/03/2026 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though the allegation of causing injuries, which are grievous and dangerous to life, has been levelled against the petitioner, by the injured witnesses-Suraj and Himmat, but these witnesses are not appearing before the Trial Court in spite of repeated summons being issued to them for procuring their presence. The charges were framed against the petitioner in the month of November, 2025 and he is in custody since 07.07.2025, hence, indulgence of bail may be granted to the petitioner. 2. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposes the prayer and submits that as per the statements of the injured witnesses-Suraj and Himmat, the petitioner has inflicted a knife blow on the vital parts of their body and these injures have been found to be (2 of 2) [CRLMB-14781/2025] grievous and dangerous to life. Hence, looking to the gravity of the allegations, indulgence of bail may not be granted to the petitioner. 3. Heard and considered the submissions made at the Bar and perused the material available on record. 4. Considering the arguments put forward by the learned Public Prosecutor and looking to the role assigned to the petitioner and injuries sustained by the injured persons, this Court is not inclined to entertain and accept the bail application submitted by the petitioner. Hence, the same stands rejected. 5. However, looking to the fact that the petitioner has been in custody and charges have been framed against him way back in the month of November, 2025 and the fact that the injured persons are not appearing before the Trial Court for recording of their statements, this Court deems it just and proper to issue a direction to the Trial Court to issue fresh summons to procure the presence of the injured witnesses for the purpose of recording of their statements. Additionally, a letter be also sent by the Trial Court to the concerned Superintendent of Police for effecting service of arrest warrants, upon the aforesaid injured witnesses to procure their present for the purpose of recording of their evidence. 6. Accordingly, the instant bail application stands rejected. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Aayush Sharma /25