[2025:RJ-JP:38110] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 10988/2025 Baje Singh S/o Poori Lal, Aged About 58 Years, R/o Gram Kadodiya, P.s .sunel, District Jhalawar (Raj.) (At Present In Sub Jail Bhawanimandi). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Shailesh Kumar Panwar For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP with Mr. Gaurav Gupta, Assistant GA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 15/09/2025 1. This bail application under Section 483 of BNSS has been filed on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.190/2024 registered at Police Station Sunel, District Jhalawar for offences punishable under Sections 189(2), 126(2) and 103(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. After completion of investigation, police filed charge-sheet in this matter. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that accused- petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. He submits that co-accused persons namely- Shivani and Gudi Bai have already been granted benefit of bail by this court. It is submitted that trial of the case will take considerable time in its conclusion as till date, only 10 witnesses have been examined out of 26 cited prosecution witnesses. Counsel submits that petitioner is in custody since [2025:RJ-JP:38110] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-10988/2025] 02.09.2024 and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner. He submits that petitioner is main accused of this case who inflicted injuries on the head of the deceased and as per post-mortem report, cause of death is ‘COMA’ due to ante-mortem head injury. 4. I have considered the contentions. 5. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the arguments advanced at bar, especially considering the fact that petitioner is the key person who inflicted injuries on the head of the deceased and same is cause of death, so far as aforementioned co-accused persons are concerned, their case was considered in the light of the fact that both accused persons are female. Further, considering the role of the petitioner mentioned in the charge-sheet as well as looking to the nature and gravity of offence, this court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. 6. Accordingly, this bail application stands dismissed. 7. The observations made hereinabove are only for disposal of the bail application and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J GAUTAM JAIN /213(s)