[2025:RJ-JP:32661] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 14082/2024 Mausam S/o Mamura, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Kaimasa, Police Station Govindgarh, District Alwar. (Presently Confined In Central Jail Alwar). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Aatish Jain Mr. Rakesh Kumar Bairwa For Respondent(s) : Mr. Anupam Sharma Mr. Vafik Choudhary Ms. Arti Sharma, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN Order 18/08/2025 1. Instant application for bail filed under Section 483 of BNSS by the applicant-accused- Mausam S/o Mamura, in FIR No. 151/2024 dated 13.04.2024 registered at P.S. Govindgarh District- Alwar, whereby the applicant-accused was charged under Sections 143, 323, 341, 354 and 307 of IPC. 2. The applicant was arrested and is in judicial custody since his arrest. The Court below has dismissed the bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant relying upon grounds raised in bail application submits that the applicant is innocent and falsely implicated in the present case. Learned counsel for petitioner further submits that for incident of 10.04.2024 report is registered on 13.04.2024 under Section [2025:RJ-JP:32661] (2 of 4) [CRLMB-14082/2024] 307 IPC against the group of persons but later on 14.04.2024 due to death of injured Juber, offence Section 302 IPC was added by police. He further submitted that the facts in the case clearly indicate that complainant party was aggressor and they initiated assault upon the accused party and it is a case of free fight. He further submitted that a cross FIR no. 172/2024 is also registered by accused party against the complainant. He further referred statement of independent witnesses Jaid Khan, Isfaq Khan @ Happi, Rizwan, Khuna @ Khanna, Rasulddin and Ashu and submitted that they have clearly stated that complainant was aggressor and they have assaulted accused party. He further referred the conclusion drawn by investigation officer and submitted that it was complainant who started altercation and due to sudden provocation there was a free fight resulting into injuries sustained to members of both group. He further referred site plan and submitted that it clearly indicate that it was complainant who suddenly provocated the incident. He also referred result drawn by investigation officer in cross FIR no. 172/2024 and submitted that the cross case is also pending. At last, he submitted that three accused were already granted bail by the trial court and case of present petitioner is identical with those accused. 4. Aforesaid contentions were opposed by learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for complainant. Learned counsel for complainant has submitted that deadly blow upon deceased Juber is attributed to present petitioner and [2025:RJ-JP:32661] (3 of 4) [CRLMB-14082/2024] the evidence on record clearly suggest that with Kassi (sharp edged weapon) Juber was assaulted by present petitioner. He further referred site plan and submitted that the incident has occurred outside the house of complainant which also indicate that accused party were aggressor. He further submitted that evidence of eye-witnesses and injured and submitted that all of them have supported the case of prosecution and they clearly stated that the present petitioner has assaulted Juber. He further submitted that the weapon was also recovered at the instance of present petitioner accused and there is no doubt about involvement of present petitioner. He further submitted that post incident the accused party have stopped and threatened complainant from approaching hospital for treatment of Juber and same is mentioned in FIR. 5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material placed on record. 6. On the basis of report dated 13.04.2024 about incident of 10.04.2024 FIR no. 151/2024 was registered at P.S. Govindgarh and during investigation injured Juber has expired on 14.04.2024. After investigation police has filed a charge-sheet against Arshad, Saleem, Mausam and Mamura under Sections 323 and 341 and 302/34 of IPC. The post- mortem of deceased Juber Ahmad clearly indicate that there was a fracture on occipital bone and cause of death is massive hemorrhage due to head injury. 7. A cross FIR no. 172/2024 is also registered on 08.05.2024 by Jainam W/o Arshad for incident of 10.04.2024 wherein [2025:RJ-JP:32661] (4 of 4) [CRLMB-14082/2024] police has filed a charge-sheet against Zakir, Tarif, Iqbal @ Sannam and Javed under Sections 147, 149, 323, 341 of IPC but closed the matter against Juber (dead) as an acused. 8. We have considered the entire material submitted on record . The material on record indicate that accused Arshad and Salim were granted bail by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Laxmangarh on 14.08.2024 and accused Mamura by same Court on 23.08.2024. Two bail cancellation application nos. 129/2024 and 132/2024 filed by Jakir Hussain are pending before this Court. 9. Having considered the totality of facts and circumstances of the case, particularly that the attribution of deadly assault is upon present petitioner and he was named from FIR to statement of witnesses and also in the conclusion of police, therefore, this is not a fit case to enlarge petitioner accused on bail. The issue raised by learned counsel for petitioner is subject matter of evidence and not at the stage of bail as the matter pertains to death of a person (Juber) within four days of incident. 10. In view of discussion made hereinabove, the bail application preferred under Section 483 of BNSS by petitioner accused- Mausam S/o Mamura is hereby dismissed. (ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J CHETNA BEHRANI /34