[2025:RJ-JP:35772] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 2nd Bail Application No. 10550/2025 Kamlesh @ Kamal S/o Dayaram, aged about 25 Years, R/o Village Kankata @ Raghunandanpura, Police Station Chaksu, District Jaipur. (presently confined at Central Jail Jaipur). ----Petitioner Versus State of Rajasthan, Through P.P. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajendra Prasad Jogi Mr. Ishan Mishra For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shree Ram Dhakad-Dy.GA cum PP Mr. Chitrank Sharma JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 08/09/2025 1. This 2nd bail application under Section 483 B.N.S.S. has been filed by petitioner in connection with the FIR No.487/2023 registered at Police Station Chaksu, District Jaipur City (South) wherein he was charged for the offences punishable under Sections 149, 148, 147, 504, 341, 323, 302 and 452 IPC (later on, he was charged for the offences under Sections 302, 307, 452, 323, 341, 325, 504, 147, 148 and 149 IPC). 2. The first bail application of the petitioner was rejected by this Court vide order dated 30.04.2024 granting liberty to the petitioner to renew his prayer for bail after recording the statements of the injured eye witnesses. 3. Counsel for the petitioner submits that after passing of the aforesaid order, now the statements of the material witnesses [2025:RJ-JP:35772] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-10550/2025] have been recorded, who have raised clear and specific overt act of causing head injury upon the deceased against the co-accused Ashok. Counsel submits that common general allegations have been levelled against the petitioner for causing injuries upon the deceased. Counsel submits that indulgence of bail has already been granted to the co-accused persons namely Jitendra, Arjunlal and Ramphool Meena against whom also similar common general allegations have been levelled and no specific overt act has been assigned to them, hence the petitioner also deserves the same indulgence. Lastly, he argued that the petitioner is in custody since the date of his arrest and the trial will take its own time to conclude, therefore indulgence of bail be granted to the petitioner. 4. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor as well as counsel for the complainant opposed the arguments raised on behalf of counsel for the petitioner and submit that apart from head injury, the deceased has sustained four injuries on ribs and allegations of causing head injuries and rib injuries upon the deceased has been assigned to the petitioner, hence the petitioner is not entitled to get indulgence of bail and the present bail application is liable to be rejected. 5. Heard and considered the submissions made at Bar and perused the material available on record. 6. Perusal of the record as well as the post mortem report indicates that the cause of death of the deceased is ante mortem head injury which is sufficient to cause of death of the deceased and this allegation has been assigned to the co-accused Ashok. The common general allegations have been levelled against the [2025:RJ-JP:35772] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-10550/2025] petitioner along with other co-accused persons namely, Ashok, Ramphool Meena and Arjunlal, Jitendra. Since the indulgence of bail has already been granted to the co-accused persons, hence the petitioner also deserves the same indulgence as no specific overt act has been assigned to him. 7. Accordingly, this second bail application under Section 483 B.N.S.S. is allowed and it is ordered that the accused-petitioner Kamlesh @ Kamal S/o Dayaram arrested in connection with aforementioned FIR, may be released on bail; provided he furnishes a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two surety bonds of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of learned trial Court with the stipulation to appear before that Court on all dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Ashu/1