[2025:RJ-JP:39004] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 11788/2025 Pyare Lal Luhar S/o Radhakishan, Aged About 37 Years, Village Kuradiya Mata Ji Ka Kheda, P.s. Jahajpur, Bhilwara, Raj. At Present Iml Factory Ke Phichhe, Jagdish Saini Ka House, Shivmandir Ke Pass Loharwada, Bagru Riico Area, Bagru, Jaipur (Raj.) (At Present The Accused Confined In Central Jail, Jaipur) ----Petitioner Versus The State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajesh Gadwal Mr. Waseem Akram For Respondent(s) : Mr. Manvendra Singh Choudhary, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN Order 17/09/2025 1. The present bail application under Section 483 of BNSS is filed by the applicant-accused Pyare Lal Luhar S/o Radhakishan seeking bail in respect of a criminal case registered as FIR No.175/2025 dated 23.04.2025 registered at P.S. Bagru District - Jaipur, for the offence under Sections 309(4), 3(5) of BNS and 3/25 of Arms Act. 2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the matter and the investigation against him is complete and he is no more required in investigation. He further submits that there are no chance of fleeing of applicant accused from the jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court. The applicant does not [2025:RJ-JP:39004] (2 of 4) [CRLMB-11788/2025] have any criminal antecedents. He also submits that the applicant undertakes not to repeat offence and cooperate with investigation/trial, which will take time. 3. Learned Counsel for Petitioner submits that after the robbery, a report was registered by Manmohan Sharma against unknown persons. He further submitted that during investigation, police recorded statement of the complainant and other persons working in the complainant’s shop, which included Rohit Bagri. He also submitted that police searched CCTV footage and concluded that only three persons took part in the incident, and these three persons were named as Sohail, Kanhaiya, and Kaushal Singh. He further submitted that the present petitioner neither visited the showroom of the complainant nor was his role and involvement proved from the CCTV footage. He also submitted that the trial court granted bail to Yogesh, who played a role in rendering assistance in the commission of the crime, and on similar grounds, this Hon’ble Court granted bail to Navneet, who was found to assist the accused. He further submitted that the present petitioner was found a few kilometers away from the crime scene, wherein he assisted accused. He also submitted that Yogesh and Navneet helped the main accused, and the case of the present petitioner is on parity with Yogesh and Navneet, and a charge sheet has been filed. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application and submitted that the allegations are grave and serious in nature. [2025:RJ-JP:39004] (3 of 4) [CRLMB-11788/2025] 5. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner-accused and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material placed on record by both the parties. 6. On the basis of a report lodged by the complainant about the commission of robbery in the evening of 22.04.2025, a report was registered after a few hours. During investigation, police recorded statements of Rohit, Praveen, and Ravi Shankar, who were eyewitnesses of the incident. The police also analyzed the CCTV footage. After finding the involvement of Sohail, Pyarelal, Kanhaiya, Yogesh, and Navneet, the police arrested them and filed charge sheet against them, but kept pending investigation against other involved persons, Kaushal Singh, Vijay, and Himanshu, under Section 193(9) of BNSS. The evidence on record suggests that the present petitioner accused was one of the conspirators along with Sohail, Kanhaiya Lal, and Kaushal Singh. The involvement and role of Yogesh and Navneet were specifically mentioned by police which is only to render assistance to Kanhaiya Lal after the incident. Yogesh was granted bail by the Learned Trial Court on 25.08.2025, whereas Navneet was granted bail by this Court on 13.08.2025. Police has filed a charge sheet, and the role and involvement of the present petitioner is similar to the main accused, Sohail, Kanhaiya and Kasuhal. The material on record indicates that after recording information under Section 23(2) of BNS, recovery was effected, though the present petitioner was the driver of truck number RJ14GP1698, used by accused before and after the incident. [2025:RJ-JP:39004] (4 of 4) [CRLMB-11788/2025] 7. The facts and the material indicate that the alleged offence are of serious nature and role attributed to applicant is prima facie sufficient to consider complicity of applicant in the crime. Therefore, at this juncture, considering the evidence collected so far, this is not a fit case to enlarge the applicant accused on bail. 8. Considering the gravity of allegations and overall facts and circumstances of the case, it is appropriate to dismiss the bail application of the applicant accused at this stage. 9. Accordingly, the application for bail filed under Section 483 of BNSS preferred by Pyare Lal Luhar S/o Radhakishan is hereby dismissed. (ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J PREETI VALECHA /31