[2025:RJ-JP:4275] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 14499/2024 1. Leelaram S/o Shri Sultan, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Jugalpura, Police Station Chandwaji, District Jaipur. (Presently Lodged In Central Jail, Jaipur). 2. Nehru @ Naru S/o Shri Sultan, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Jugalpura, Police Station Chandwaji, District Jaipur. (Presently Lodged In Central Jail, Jaipur). ----Petitioners Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sudhir Jain For Respondent(s) : Mr. M.S. Shekhawat, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 30/01/2025 1. Counsel for the petitioners seek withdrawal of this bail application qua accused-petitioner No.1 i.e. Leelaram S/o Shri Sultan with liberty to renew the prayer of bail after recording the testimony of complainant Kali Devi Nayak and injured witness Sandeep Nayak. 2. Permission sought for is granted. 3. Accordingly, this bail application is dismissed as withdrawn qua accused-petitioner No.1 Leelaram S/o Shri Sultan with liberty as prayed for. 4. Learned trial Court is requested to record testimony of aforesaid witnesses on priority basis. [2025:RJ-JP:4275] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-14499/2024] 5. So far as accused-petitioner No.2 Nehru @ Naru S/o Shri Sultan is concerned, he has preferred the instant bail application under Section 483 of BNSS. He is arrested in connection with FIR No.375/2024 registered at Police Station Chandwaji, District Jaipur Rural (Raj.) for the offences punishable under Sections 189(2), 109(1) & 331(7) of BNS. Later on, police filed charge-sheet in this matter for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1), 126(2), 115(2) & 3(5) of BNS. 6. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the accused-petitioner No.2 has falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel submits that there is no allegation levelled against the petitioner in the statement of eye-witnesses and complainant. Counsel submits that he has been made accused on the basis of some other witnesses who have been examined after one and half month of alleged incident. Counsel submits that deceased was admitted in the hospital and it was disclosed that he sustained head injury on account of falling of stone over his head. Counsel further submits that there are no criminal antecedents of the petitioner No.2. He in custody since 16.10.2024. Further custody of the petitioner No.2 would not serve any fruitful purpose. 7. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner. 8. I have considered the contentions. 9. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by the counsel for the petitioner No.2; as also the statement of complainant and [2025:RJ-JP:4275] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-14499/2024] injured witness Sandeep Nayak; material available on record in the form of charge-sheet; absence criminal antecedents of the petitioner No.2, looking to the custody period, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it proper to allow the bail application. 10. This bail application is accordingly partly allowed qua accused-petitioner No.2-Nehru @ Naru S/o Shri Sultan. He 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. 11. 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 /112