[2025:RJ-JP:39769] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 10613/2025 Farid Khan S/o Naeem Khan, Aged About 23 Years, R/o Ratan- pura (Naya Gaon) Aklera, Police Station Aklera, District Jhalawar (Raj). (Petitioner Presently Confined At Sub Jail, Aklera, Jha- lawar, Rajasthan). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Its PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ripunjay Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP with Mr. Tapesh Agarwal, PP Mr. Gaurav Gupta, Assistant GA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 23/09/2025 1. This bail application under Section 483 of BNSS has been filed on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.152/2025 registered at Police Station Aklera, District Jhalawar for offences punishable under Sections 103(1) and 115(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, (in short ‘BNS’) 2023. After completion of investigation, police filed charge- sheet in this matter for offence punishable under Section 103(1) of BNS, 2023. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case on account of old enmity. He submits that some material prosecution witnesses have been examined during the course of trial and it appears from their [2025:RJ-JP:39769] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-10613/2025] testimony that all of them have improved their version. It is submitted that one independent eye witness namely- Shoyeb @ Golu has not supported the prosecution case and he has been declared hostile. It is contended that trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. Counsel submits that petitioner is in custody since 02.03.2025 and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the bail application. He submits that petitioner is sole accused of this case and all eye witnesses have clearly stated that petitioner caused knife injuries on the person of deceased and same is corroborated by the postmortem report. It is submitted that blood stained shirt and murder weapon (knife) have been recovered at the instance of the petitioner. He further submits that trial in this case, where a person has lost his life is still in its initial stage and evidence of crucial witnesses is yet to be recorded. 4. I have considered the contentions. 5. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the arguments advanced at bar, especially considering the material available on record including testimony of prosecution witnesses and eye-witness, as also considering the role attributed to the petitioner, so also the fact that murder weapon (knife) and blood stained shirt have been recovered at the instance of the petitioner as well as looking to the nature and gravity of offence, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. 6. Accordingly, this bail application stands dismissed. [2025:RJ-JP:39769] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-10613/2025] 7. It is suffice to say that while considering the application for bail, deep appreciation of evidence and testimony of witnesses is avoided and same shall be considered by the trial court at the appropriate stage of proceedings. 8. The observations made hereinabove are only for disposal of the bail application and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J GAUTAM JAIN /117