[2025:RJ-JP:13783] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 890/2025 Babulal S/o Munnalal, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Baiji Wali Dhani, Alooda, Police Station Paparda, District Dausa, Rajasthan. (At Present Confined In District Jail Dausa). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ritesh Jain Ms. Poonam Mishra Dr. Ramdev Arya For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shriram Dhakad, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 26/03/2025 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.243/2024 registered at Police Station Sikandra, District Dausa (Raj.) for the offences punishable under Sections 279 & 304A of IPC. Later on, police filed charge-sheet in this matter for the offences punishable under Section 302 & 120B of IPC. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel submits that initially FIR was registered for the offences punishable under Sections 279 & 304A of IPC but later on, police converted the same for the offences punishable under Section 302 of IPC on the basis of the fact that wife of the deceased made extra judicial confession [2025:RJ-JP:13783] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-890/2025] before the complainant and his family members wherein she said that she instigated the petitioner to commit murder of the deceased. Counsel submits that alleged confession made on 05.06.2024 while statement of the complainant under Section 161 of Cr.PC was recorded on 08.08.2024 and on same day arrest of the petitioner was also made. Counsel submits that there is no plausible reason available on record with regard to the delay in recording the said statement. Counsel submits that there are no criminal antecedents of the petitioner and trial of the case will take considerable time. Further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner. 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, material available on record in the form of charge-sheet; absence of criminal antecedents of the petitioner; period of custody, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it fit and proper to allow this bail application. 6. This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner- Babulal S/o Munnalal 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 only) each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court with the [2025:RJ-JP:13783] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-890/2025] 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. 7. The observations made herein above are only for decision of the instant bail application and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J LALIT MOHAN /102