[2025:RJ-JP:4432] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 738/2024 Devendra @ Nanu S/o Pappu, Aged About 23 Years, R/o Kani Mohalla Tigawan, Police Station Kotkasim, District Khairthal- Tijara, Raj. (At Present Confined In Sub Jail Kishangarh Bas, District Khairthal-Tijara). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent Connected With S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 8439/2024 Khemchand @ Khemu S/o Late Sarjeet, Aged About 22 Years, R/o Kani Mohalla Tigawan, Police Station Kotkasim, District Khairthal- Tijara, Raj. (At Present Confined In Sub Jail Kishangarh Bas, District Khairthal-Tijara). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sumer Singh Ola with Mr. Pallav Choudhary For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP Mr. Rahul Sharma with Mr. Utkarsh Goyal Mr. Amit Kumar, SHO Kotkasim HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN O R D E R DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT:- 30.01.2025 1. These bail applications have been filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., on behalf of the petitioners, who have been arrested in connection with FIR No.390/2023 registered at Police Station [2025:RJ-JP:4432] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-738/2024] Kotkasim, District Khairthal-Tijara (Raj.) for the offences punishable under Sections 302 & 201 of IPC. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel submits that entire prosecution case is based on circumstantial evidence as FIR was lodged against unknown person. He submits that no evidence was available with the Investigation Agency before making arrest of the petitioners. It is submitted that no CCTV footage of last seen is available on record. Petitioners are in custody since 16.09.2023 & there are no criminal antecedents against them. Charge-sheet has been filed & trial of the case will take considerable time. Further custody of the petitioners would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned State Counsel assisted by learned counsel for complainant vehemently opposes the bail applications. They submit that initially matter was investigated wherein it was found that according to the call details & mobile location of petitioners, they were found near the place where dead body of the deceased was recovered. It is also evident from the record that accused- Khemchand @ Khemu was in affair with a female with whom deceased was also in relationship. For this reason, petitioner- Khemchand @ Khemu was annoyed with the deceased & he made plan with the co-accused-Devendra to murder the deceased. They further submit that mobile phone of deceased has also been recovered at the instance of the petitioner-Khemchand @ Khemu. 4. Heard. Perused the material available on record in the form of charge-sheet. [2025:RJ-JP:4432] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-738/2024] 5. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the arguments advanced at bar, especially the fact that mobile phone of deceased has been recovered at the instance of the petitioner-Khemchand @ Khemu & as per mobile location of the petitioners, they were found near the place where dead body was found, I do not find it a fit case to enlarge the petitioners on bail. 6. Accordingly, these bail applications are dismissed. 7. However, petitioners would be at liberty to renew the prayer of bail after recording the testimony of Investigating Officer of this case. 8. Learned trial court is also requested to record the testimony of Investigating Officer of this case on priority basis. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J GAUTAM JAIN /282-283