[2025:RJ-JP:3669] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Third Bail Application No. 540/2025 Satyaveer S/o Late Shri Raghuveer Singh, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Ghoslya Ki Dhani, Tan Patwari Ka Bas, Police Station Shrimadhoupur, District Sikar (Rajasthan) (At Present Lodged In Sub Jail Neem Ka Thana). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. V.R. Bajwa, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Aman Kumar & Mr. Sanjay Khedar For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 23/01/2025 1. The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 BNSS on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.134/2023 registered at Police Station Reengus, District Sikar (Raj.) for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323 & 307 of IPC. Later on, police filed charge-sheet in this matter for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 302, 325, 504 & 506 of IPC. 2. Second bail application of the petitioner was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to renew the prayer of bail after recording the testimony of medical expert who conducted post-mortem. Now, medical expert has been examined during the course of trial. Thus, this third bail application. [2025:RJ-JP:3669] (2 of 4) [CRLMB-540/2025] 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel submits that according to the prosecution case, there is allegation against the petitioner that petitioner came in his Scorpio vehicle and gave beatings to the Ramjilal Saini and thereafter, he ran the Scorpio vehicle over the deceased. Counsel submits that allegation levelled in the FIR are not corroborated by the testimony of the medical expert because no crush injury was found on the person of the deceased. Rather, he clearly mentioned that there was mob outside the post-mortem room and they were forced by the police to write/mention in the report that death was caused due to running the Scorpio vehicle over the deceased. Counsel submits that none of the injuries sustained to the deceased can be said as crush injury and cause of death was Hemorrhagic shock on account of internal excessive bleeding. Counsel submits that on a suggestion given to him, the medical officer said that if a person who is suffering from heart disease, and taking medicine to dilute blood, in that eventuality, simple injury may cause internal bleeding and it can be uncontrolled and this internal bleeding can cause death. Counsel submits that it is also evident from the evidence of the medical expert that injury sustained to deceased was caused on account of unfortunate accident as there was collision between deceased and vehicle. Counsel submits that it is also apparent from the CCTV footage submitted by the investigating agency that deceased himself came in front of the Scorpio car and met with accident. Counsel submits that there are 48 cited witnesses in this case and till date only 13 witnesses have [2025:RJ-JP:3669] (3 of 4) [CRLMB-540/2025] been examined. Counsel submits that petitioner is a practicing Advocate and is in custody since 11.03.2023 and trial will take considerable time. Further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner. He submits that first bail application of the petitioner was dismissed on merits vide order dated 24.08.2023 and FIR was registered on the Parcha Bayan of the deceased. He further submits that there is no substantial change in the circumstances so as to entertain this bail application. 5. I have considered the contentions. 6. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner as well as considering the testimony of the medical expert, as also the fact that out of 48 cited witnesses, only 13 witnesses have been examined till date; period of incarceration served by the petitioner till date, which is almost 22 months and trial will take time in its conclusion, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it fit and proper to allow this bail application. 7. This third bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner Satyaveer S/o Late Shri Raghuveer Singh 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 [2025:RJ-JP:3669] (4 of 4) [CRLMB-540/2025] 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. 8. The observation made hereinabove is only for decision of the instant bail application and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J LALIT MOHAN /38