[2025:RJ-JP:32168] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 9396/2025 Smt. Kuntidevi W/o Prahlad, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Naroli, P.s. Rudawal, Presently R/o Jawahar Colony, Faridabad, P.s. Dabua, Haryana. (At Present In Jail At Bharatpur). ----Petitioner Versus The State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sajid Ali For Respondent(s) For Complainant(s) : : Mr. Tapesh Agarwal, PP Mr. Sukhdev Singh Solanki HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 18/08/2025 1. The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.915/2018 registered at Police Station Bayana, District Bharatpur (Rajasthan) for the offences punishable under Sections 323 & 341 of IPC. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel submits that other co-accused namely Jeevan and Prahalad have already been granted benefit of bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court. Counsel submits that charge-sheet has been filed in this matter. It is submitted that trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. Counsel contends that petitioner who is a female is in custody since 30.06.2025 and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor assisted by learned counsel for the complainant vehemently opposes the submissions made by [2025:RJ-JP:32168] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-9396/2025] counsel for the petitioner. They submit that petitioner remained absconded for a long period and after great efforts of the investigating agency, she has been taken in custody. 4. I have considered the contentions. 5. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner, especially considering the fact that petitioner is female and in custody since 30.06.2025; charge- sheet has been filed in this matter and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it fit and proper to allow this bail application. 6. This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner -Smt. Kuntidevi W/o Prahlad shall be released on bail provided she furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court with the stipulation that she shall appear before that Court and any court to which the matter is transferred, on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so. 7. The observations made hereinabove are only for decision of the instant bail application and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J LALIT MOHAN /195