[2025:RJ-JP:30017] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 7740/2025 Uday Singh S/o Shreelal, R/o Dalilpur, Police Station Kudgaon, District Karauli At Present Lodged In The District Jail, Karauli ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through The PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ashvin Garg For Respondent(s) For Complainant(s) : : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP with Mr. Tapesh Agarwal, PP Mr. Kapil Gupta HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 04/08/2025 This bail application under Section 483 BNSS has been filed on behalf of the accused petitioner who is in custody since 08.02.2025 in connection with FIR No.14/2025 PS Kudgaon District Karauli for offences under Sections 103(1), 80(2), 238(a), 352, 351(3), 189(2) BNS. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the accused petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. He submits that the petitioner has not committed any offence. He has been roped in this case only on the basis of suspicion. It is contended that there is no evidence available on record suggesting that the deceased was ever subjected to cruelty by the petitioner. As a matter of fact, the deceased committed suicide as she was being harassed by one Ankit Meena, with whom, earlier she was in love affair but later on, he started blackmailing her. It is also argued [2025:RJ-JP:30017] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-7740/2025] that with the consent of the family members including parents of the deceased, cremation of the dead body was performed. Neither the petitioner nor his family member pressurized or forced anybody for not conducting the postmortem of the dead body. The petitioner is in custody since 08.02.2025 whereas trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the complainant oppose the bail application. It is contended that the deceased died in unnatural circumstances in her matrimonial house and in order to hide the truth, intentionally, postmortem of the dead body was not conducted. It is submitted that actually, the petitioner gave beatings to the deceased due to which, she died in her matrimonial home. As per the statements of the witnesses recorded under Section 180 BNSS, there were several marks of injuries on the dead body. Heard. As per the material available on record, during investigation, it has been stated by witnesses in their statements recorded under Section 180 BNSS that there were several marks of injuries on the dead body and that the petitioner and his family members were against in getting the postmortem conducted over the dead body. The deceased died in unnatural circumstances in her matrimonial home and without getting the postmortem conducted on the dead body, cremation was performed. If postmortem of the dead body had been conducted, the cause of death would have revealed but without getting the postmortem conducted over the dead body, same was cremated. Thus, having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the [2025:RJ-JP:30017] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-7740/2025] arguments advanced by both the parties especially the happening of the death of the deceased in unnatural circumstances in her matrimonial home and postmortem was not conducted but without making any comments on the merits/demerits of the case, I am not inclined to accept the instant bail application at this stage, which is dismissed as such. The observation made herein is only for decision of the bail application and would not prejudice trial in any manner. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN ), J LALIT MOHAN /209