[2025:RJ-JP:21622] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Misc. Second Bail Application No. 11/2025 Vidhyaram S/o Nirbhay Singh, R/o Kheri Dang, Ps Gadhibajana, District Bharatpur. At Present Confined In Sub Jail, Bayana ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. H.C. Ganeshia For Respondent(s) : Ms. Arti Sharma, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANEESH SHARMA Order 22/05/2025 1. The instant second bail application has been filed under Section 483 B.N.S.S. on behalf of the accused-petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.72/2020 registered at Police Station Gadhi Bajana, District Bharatpur for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 307, 447, 427 and 34 of IPC. During the course of investigation, charge-sheet has been filed for the offences under Sections 147, 307, 447, 427, 34 and 302 of IPC and Sections 3/25(6) of Arms Act. 2. The first bail application of the accused-petitioner was dismissed vide order dated 07.03.2024 by this Court, thus, this second bail application is preferred. 3. Learned counsel for the accused-petitioner submits that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. He submits that out of 35 witnesses, only 18 to 20 witnesses have been examined. He further submits that the accused-petitioner is [2025:RJ-JP:21622] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-11/2025] in custody for four years and one month, therefore, the bail application of the accused-petitioner may be allowed. Further custody of the accused-petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the second bail application. 5. Heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. The first bail application of the accused-petitioner was dismissed vide order dated 07.03.2024 by this Court considering the role of the accused-petitioner attributed in commission of the alleged offence wherein it has been observed as under:- "7. Considering the fact that there is direct allegation against the applicant of opening fire at the deceased and the deceased died due to gunshot injury assigned to the applicant and case of the applicant is not at par with that of the co-accused who have been granted bail, I am not inclined to entertain the bail application and the same is accordingly, dismissed." 7. Considering the nature of offences and gravity of allegations attributed to the accused-petitioner, the first bail application of the accused-petitioner was dismissed by this Court and since, at this stage, the counsel for the accused-petitioner has failed to point out any material change in circumstances after rejection of first bail application, as also, there is no substantial change in the factual situation between the earlier and the subsequent one, hence filing of second bail application on the basis of new arguments and new twists on same fact, cannot be encouraged. [2025:RJ-JP:21622] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-11/2025] Thus, I am not inclined to enlarge the accused-petitioner on bail. Hence, this second bail application of the accused-petitioner is hereby dismissed. 8. However, it is made clear that since the accused-petitioner is in custody since last four years and one month, therefore, the trial court is directed to conclude the trial expeditiously, as far as possible. (MANEESH SHARMA),J DEEPA RANI -11