[2025:RJ-JP:13244] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 15243/2024 Devisahay S/o Ramkishor, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Balpada, Dhani Golada, Police Station Baijupada, District Dausa (Raj.). (At Present Petitioner Confined At Sub Jail Bandikui). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent Connected With S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 502/2025 Jagdish @ Bhumiya S/o Daularam, R/o Balyada Dhani Golada, Police Station Baijupada, District Dausa (Raj.). (At Present Petitioner Confined At Sub Jail Bandikui). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Arvind Sharma Mr. Shashi Kant Saini For Respondent(s) For Complainant(s) : : Mr. Shriram Dhakad, PP Mr. Pushpendra Kumar Saini Mr. Ajit Kaswa HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 24/03/2025 1. These two bail applications under Section 483 of BNSS have been filed on behalf of the petitioners herein who are in custody in connection with FIR No.203/2024 registered at Police Station Baijupada, District Dausa (Raj.) for the offences punishable under Sections 189(2), 115(2), 126(2), 74 and 109(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, (in short ‘BNS’) 2023. Later on, police filed charge- [2025:RJ-JP:13244] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-15243/2024] sheet in this matter for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 74, 109(1), 191(2), 191(3), 190 and 118(2) of BNS, 2023. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that the accused-petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. It is submitted that cross-cases have been registered between the parties and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. It is submitted that petitioner- Devisahay is in custody since 05.11.2024 and petitioner- Jagdish @ Bhumiya is in custody since 01.12.2024 and further custody of the petitioners would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned counsel arguing on behalf of petitioner Jagdish @ Bhumiya submits that there is no allegation against the petitioner of causing injury on the person of the injured namely- Kaluram who has sustained life threatening injury and only allegation against him is that he caused simple injuries on the person of injured- Uganti Devi and Gulli Devi. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor assisted by learned counsel for the complainant vehemently opposes the submissions made by the counsel for the petitioners. It is submitted that according to the medical report, head injury sustained by Kaluram has been opined as life threatening injury which is caused by blunt object. It is submitted that in pursuance of order dated 17.02.2025, medical board was constituted and it has been opined by them that injured-Kaluram did not communicate effectively and was uncooperative due to head injury therefore, his statement could not be recorded. [2025:RJ-JP:13244] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-15243/2024] 5. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, especially the fact that till date injured Kaluram is not in a position to speak and as such his statement could not be recorded by the Investigating Agency, I do not find it a fit case to allow these bail applications. 6. Accordingly, these bail applications stand dismissed. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J LALIT MOHAN /99 & 101