[2025:RJ-JP:31446] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 2nd Bail Application No. 7222/2025 Suresh Pankaj S/o Shrilal Pankaj, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Village Patwar, Police Station Jawar, District Jhalawar (Rajasthan), Presently Residing At Near Kohinoor School, Barda Basti, Anantpura, Kota. (At Present Confined In District Jail Kota). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Nitin Kumar Sharma with Mr. Pankaj Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Amit Gupta, P.P. Mr. Gaurav Gupta, P.P. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI Order 13/08/2025 1. This 2nd bail application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (B.N.S.S.) has been filed on behalf of the petitioner–Suresh Pankaj, in connection with FIR No.106/2023 registered at Police Station Anantpur, District Kota (Rajasthan), for offences under Sections 323, 341, 307, 302, and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case, he has nothing to do with the alleged offences & he is behind the bars since 15.03.2023. Trial of the case is likely to take long time to conclude & till then, his further incarceration would not serve any fruitful purpose. He [2025:RJ-JP:31446] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-7222/2025] is ready and willing to furnish bail bonds for his release. Looking to the overall facts and circumstances of the case & the period of custody, the 2nd bail application of the petitioner deserved to be allowed. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application and submitted that the petitioner is the main accused, who assaulted the deceased, namely Mukesh Nayak on the head with a stick, resulting into his death & the blood stained 'lathi' has also been recovered at the instance of the petitioner. As per the post mortem report, the cause of death was a head injury. Thus, the 2nd bail application filed under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. deserves to be dismissed. 4. Heard learned counsel for both the parties & perused the material made available on record, including the allegations levelled in the F.I.R. 5. Thus, without commenting upon the merits/demerits of the case and looking to the overall facts and circumstances of the case, this Court does not deem it appropriate to grant the benefit of regular bail to the accused-petitioner. 6. Accordingly, the 2nd bail application filed under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. is dismissed. (VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI),J SAURABH /37