[2025:RJ-JP:2665] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 745/2025 Ramgopal S/o Goduram, Aged About 70 Years, R/o Dilawariya Ki Dhani, Ward No. 37, Bandikui, Police Station Bandikui, District Dausa. (At Present Confined In District Jail Dausa). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ritesh Jain with Dr. Ramdev Arya For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 20/01/2025 1. The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS. on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.458/2001 registered at Police Station Bandikui, District Dausa for the offence under Section 302 of IPC. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. He submits that the FIR was lodged in this matter on 06.11.2001 wherein after thorough investigation, police submitted the negative final report. He submits that the protest petition filed by the complainant was also dismissed by the learned Magistrate. Thereafter the said order was assailed by the complainant by filing the revision petition wherein petition was allowed & matter was remanded to pass fresh order. It is submitted that in pursuance of order passed by the learned Revisional Court, learned trial court [2025:RJ-JP:2665] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-745/2025] took cognizance against the petitioner for the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC & summoned the petitioner through warrant of arrest. Counsel contends that at the first instance, petitioner should not have been summoned through warrant of arrest. Learned counsel has placed reliance upon Hon’ble Supreme Court judgment passed in the case of Vikas vs. State of Rajasthan, reported in AIR 2014 SC (CRIMINAL) 231. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the bail application. 4. I have considered the contentions. 5. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner as also the fact that initially, protest petition filed by the complainant side was dismissed and thereafter, cognizance has been taken against the petitioner by the trial court in pursuance of the order of revisional court; the petitioner is old aged person; charge-sheet has been filed as well as the law laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Vikas (supra), but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it proper to allow the bail application. The observations 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. 6. This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner - Ramgopal S/o Goduram, 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 [2025:RJ-JP:2665] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-745/2025] 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. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J GAUTAM JAIN /314