[2025:RJ-JP:38560] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 10297/2025 Vijaypal S/o Vishambhar Singh, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Village Didhi, Police Station Rajakhera, District Dholpur- Raj. (At Present Confined In District Jail Dholpur) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent Connected With S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 11882/2025 Ramnaresh @ Naresh @ Neta S/o Shri Lokman, R/o Village Didhi, Police Station Rajakhera, District Dholpur. (At Present Confined In District Jail Dholpur). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Yogesh Singhal For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shree Ram Dhakar, PP, Mr. Dushyant Jain for complainant HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR Order 19/09/2025 1. These instant bail applications have been filed under Section 483 BNSS on behalf of accused-petitioners. The petitioners have been arrested in connection with FIR No.68/2025 registered at Police Station Raja Khera, District Dholpur for the offence(s) under Sections 189(2), 115(2), 126(2), 351(2) and 109(1) of BNS. 2. Learned counsel for the accused-petitioners submits that the accused-petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. He [2025:RJ-JP:38560] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-10297/2025] further submits that the petitioners's name did not appear in the FIR and the FIR itself is delayed by 19 hours. The name of the petitioners have been implicated after the incident relying upon the statements of so-called eye witnesses Bhuri Singh, Ramavtar and Madhav Singh. The allegations are not specific rather omnibus in nature and the eye witnesses are planted witnesses and were not present at the place of occurrence. The incident took place in evening on 05:00 PM, however, the police did not investigate the matter properly and recorded the statement of persons who were living nearby to the place of occurrence. The petitioners are in custody since 09.04.2025, therefore, these bail applications of the accused-petitioners may be allowed. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor as well as learned counsel for the complainant have vehemently opposed these bail applications and contended that the petitioners along with the other co-accused assaulted the deceased and caused his death. The deceased Bhupendra received multiple injuries and the death of the deceased was caused due to injuries sustained on his vital organs. At this stage, it cannot be said that the eye witnesses are planted and apart from the statements of the eye witnesses, recovery of weapons were also made from the petitioners, considering the above facts, the bail applications of the accused-petitioners may be dismissed. 4. Heard and perused the material available on record. 5. Considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioners and looking to the fact that the eye witnesses Bhuri Singh, Ramavtar and Madho Singh in their statement recorded under Sections 180 and 183 of BNSS have clearly stated that the [2025:RJ-JP:38560] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-10297/2025] petitioners along with the other co-accused assaulted the deceased Bhupendra which resulted into his death. The postmortem report shows that the injured received as many as 10 injuries and cause of death is due to injuries on the vital parts, therefore, considering the above facts, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the accused-petitioners on bail. 6. Hence, the criminal misc. bail applications of the accused- petitioners is hereby dismissed. (PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J Keshav/97-98