[2025:RJ-JP:10359] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 3rd Bail Application No. 15154/2024 Vinod Kumar S/o Samundra Prasad, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Nayi Aabadi Bapi, Police Station Saithal, District Dausa. (At Present Confined At District Jail Dausa) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mahendra Shandilya with Mr. Manish Kumar Meena, Mr. Apoorav Singh Panwar, Mr. Munish Meena & Mr. Ajay Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Naresh Gupta, P.P. Mr. Rajendra Singh Tanwar HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI Order 07/03/2025 1. The 3rd bail application has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C./483 B.N.S.S. on behalf of accused-petitioner in the matter arising out of F.I.R. No.30/2023 registered at Police Station Sainthal, Dausa for the offence(s) punishable under Section(s) 147, 148, 302 r/w 149, 341 r/w 149, 323 r/w 149 & 325 r/w 149 of I.P.C. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case, he has nothing to do with the alleged offences and he is behind the bars since 10.03.2023. Counsel further submits that the statements of 23 prosecution witnesses out of 49 have been recorded, the prosecution witnesses namely, Moti Singh (PW-3), Virendar (PW-4) & Nahar [2025:RJ-JP:10359] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-15154/2024] Singh (PW-1) are eye-witnesses in this case and they made improvements in their statements. Counsel further submits that there are contradictions in the statements of eye-witnesses recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. as well as during trial. During trial, eye-witnesses in their statements stated that the petitioner, namely Vinod had beaten to the deceased with a lathi, but the lathi was not recovered from the petitioner, namely Vinod. Counsel further submits that as per the post mortem report, cause of death of the deceased was the head injury and there is no witness against petitioner who can establish the claim that the head injury to the deceased was caused by the petitioner, namely Vinod. Trial of the case is likely to take a long time to conclude, till then, his further incarceration would not serve any fruitful purpose and he is ready and willing to furnish his bail bonds. Therefore, the 3rd bail application deserves to be allowed. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the complainant-respondent have vehemently opposed the bail application. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material made available on record. 5. Taking into consideration the submissions put forth and overall facts & circumstances of the case, custody period and evidence came on record during investigation as well as during trial but without commenting upon detailed merits of the case, this Court deems it fit to enlarge the accused-petitioner on bail. 6. Therefore, the 3rd bail application is allowed. Accused- petitioner, namely Vinod Kumar S/o Samundra Prasad, shall be [2025:RJ-JP:10359] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-15154/2024] released on bail, if he is not required in any other case, provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Fifty Thousand) together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Twenty-five Thousand) each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court with the stipulation that he shall appear before that Court and any other court to which the matter is transferred, on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when he is called upon to do so. (VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI),J SAURABH /04