[2025:RJ-JP:41838] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal 2nd Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 10586/2025 Amit Kumar S/o Indraj Singh, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Dhani Burdkan Tan Kaliasar, Police Station Malsisar, District Jhunjhunu (Rajasthan), At Present Resident Of Sainik Nagar, Jhunjhunu, Police Station Kotwali, Jhunjhunu, District Jhunjhunu (Raj.) (Presently Confined In District Jail Jhunjhunu). ----Accused Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ravindra Kumar Paliwal For Respondent(s) : Mr. Jitendra Singh Rathore, Addl.G.A. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BHUWAN GOYAL Order 14/10/2025 This 2nd bail application has been filed by the petitioner under Section 483 BNSS in FIR No.573/2022 registered at Police Station Kotwali, District Jhunjhunu for the offence under Sections 143, 307, 420 and 406 IPC. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case. He further submits that co-accused Indraj and Karamveer have already been enlarged on bail by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 28.07.2025 in S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 5905/2025 and 5906/2025, respectively. Learned counsel further submits that there was neither any intention nor any motive of the petitioner to commit the murder of [2025:RJ-JP:41838] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-10586/2025] deceased-Yakub. Even if, the prosecution story is taken to be true, the alleged offence would not travel beyond Section 304 Part-II IPC. He further submits that a civil dispute is pending between the parties. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that after filing the charge-sheet, charge has not been framed against the petitioner yet. The petitioner is in judicial custody since 22.09.2022. The conclusion of trial is likely to take long time. Hence, the petitioner be enlarged on bail. Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon the judgement passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this court in the case of (i) Ishwar Singh V/s State of Rajasthan (S.B. Cr. Misc. Bail Application No. 4457/2023) & another connected matter and the judgement passed by the Punjab and Haryana High Court at Chandigarh in the case of Avtar Singh @ Ata Pattu V/s. State of Punjab (CRM-M-25639-24; decided on 14.1.2025) Learned Additional Government Advocate has vehemently opposed the same and submitted that the petitioner has been named in the FIR. He further submits that the petitioner and other co-accused persons with common intention, played forgery with the complainant. He further submits that from the statement of eye witnesses, it is clear that the petitioner with an intent to commit murder, drove jeep and dashed deceased-Yakub and injured-Iqbal. The case of the petitioner is on different footings to that of co-accused persons, who have been enlarged on bail as they were sitting in the Jeep. Hence, the 2nd bail application filed by the petitioner be dismissed. [2025:RJ-JP:41838] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-10586/2025] I have considered the contentions and gone through the material available on record. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and looking to the nature and gravity of the allegations levelled against the petitioner and more particularly in view of the fact that there is no change in the facts and circumstances of the case after dismissal of the first bail application filed by the petitioner, without commenting upon merits and demerits of the case, this Court is not inclined to grant indulgence of bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the 2nd bail application filed by the petitioner stands dismissed. However, the learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same as early as possible. (BHUWAN GOYAL),J D.K./1