[2025:RJ-JP:37143] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 11437/2025 Netram S/o Shri Baliram, Aged About 43 Years, R/o Singhaan Meena, P.s. Sadar, Hindaun, Distt. Karauli (Raj.). (Presently In Sub Jail At Hindaun, District Karauli). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Anurag Sharma For Respondent(s) For Complainant(s) : : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP with Mr. Tapesh Agarwal, PP & Mr. Gaurav Gupta, Asstt. G.A. Mr. Yogesh Kumar Sharma HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 10/09/2025 1. This bail application has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.197/2025 registered at Police Station Hindon Sadar, District Karauli (Rajasthan) for offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 103(1), 238(a) & 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, (in short ‘BNS’) 2023. After completion of investigation, police filed charge-sheet in this matter for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 238(a), 105 & 107 of BNS, 2023 and Section 66C of Information Technology (Amended) Act, 2008. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel submits that story narrated by the complainant has been disbelieved by the [2025:RJ-JP:37143] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-11437/2025] Investigating Agency and it has been concluded that deceased himself jumped into the well. Counsel submits that allegation that deceased was beaten before death is baseless as no mark/sign of any kind of beating was found on the person of the deceased during postmortem. He further submits that offence punishable under Section 103(1) of BNS has not been found proved by the Investigating Agency and charge-sheet has been filed for the offence punishable under Section 105 of BNS i.e., culpable homicide not amounting to murder. It is contended that there are no criminal antecedents against the petitioner and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. Counsel submits that petitioner is in custody since 15.05.2025 and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned State counsel assisted by learned counsel for the complainant vehemently opposes the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner. It is submitted that sufficient evidence is available on record against the petitioner. It is further submitted that deceased was having affair with a girl belonging to family of the petitioner therefore, he was chased by the petitioner and others and due to fear, he jumped into the well. However, they fairly concede that story narrated by the complainant in respect of abduction and beating before death has not been found true in the investigation. 4. I have considered the contentions. 5. Taking into consideration all the material on record and the arguments put forward by both the sides and further considering the fact that Investigating Agency has filed charge-sheet for the [2025:RJ-JP:37143] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-11437/2025] offence punishable under Section 105 of BNS i.e., culpable homicide not amounting to murder, as also the fact that no sign/mark of violence has been noted by the medical board on the person of the deceased during postmortem, so also the fact that there are no criminal antecedents against the petitioner and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion as well as looking to the period of custody, 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 -Netram S/o Shri Baliram shall be released on bail provided he 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 he 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 bail application and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J LALIT MOHAN /252