[2025:RJ-JP:15637] sHIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 12146/2024 Vijayshankar Tank S/o Shri Srilal, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Village Ramsar Tehsil Nasirabad District Ajmer, At Present In Central Jail, Ajmer. ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through P P. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Harendra Singh with Mr. Shivam For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP Mr. Ravinder Kumar Paliwal for complainant HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 16/01/2025 1. The instant bail application under Section 483 of BNSS has been filed on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.322/2024 registered at Police Station Nasirabad Sadar, District Ajmer (Raj.) for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (in short ‘BNS’), 2023. Later on, police filed charge-sheet in this matter for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1) and 238(a) of BNS. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. He submits that petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged against him. It is submitted [2025:RJ-JP:15637] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-12146/2024] that he has been roped in this case only on the basis of surmises, conjectures and suspicion. It is the case of circumstantial evidence and there is no eye-witness of the alleged incident. The petitioner does not have any criminal antecedents. Investigation has been completed and charge-sheet has been filed. Counsel submits that no fruitful purpose has been served by keeping the petitioner behind the bars for an indefinite time period. Trial will take time in its conclusion. 3. Learned State Counsel assisted by learned counsel for complainant vehemently opposes the bail application. It is submitted that CCTV footages of the cameras installed in the village were collected and analysed. As per one CCTV footage, at around 12:05 AM in the night, the deceased was lastly seen going with the petitioner and in another CCTV footage of around 01:06 AM in the night, the petitioner was seen coming lonely that is to say that in one CCTV footage both petitioner and deceased were seen together and in another CCTV footage the petitioner was seen alone and thereafter, the deceased was not seen alive and was found dead. They thus, submit that it cannot be said the petitioner has been booked without any basis. 4. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the arguments advanced at bar, as also the material made available before me including the chargve sheet and the analysis of CCTV footage wherein in one CCTV footage both petitioner and deceased were seen together and in [2025:RJ-JP:15637] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-12146/2024] another CCTV footage, the petitioner was seen alone and thereafter, the deceased was not seen alive and was found dead, I do not find it a fit case to enlarge the petitioner on bail. 5. Accordingly, this bail application is dismissed. 6. The observation made hereinabove is only for disposal of the instant bail application and would not prejudice trial in any manner. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN), J GAUTAM JAIN /103