[2025:RJ-JP:43847] (1 of 2) [CRLMB-13767/2025] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 3rd Bail Application No. 13767/2025 Kanak @ Manisha D/o Late Shri Purshotam Agarwal, R/o Mahwa Mandawar Road, Jawahar Colony, Police Station Ke Pass, Police Station Mahwa, District Dausa (At Present In Mahila Jail Jaipur). ----Accused-Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Manoj Singh Chouhan, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP with Mr. Tapesh Agarwal, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 28/10/2025 1. This third bail application has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.226/2022 registered at Police Station Kalwar, District Jaipur (West) for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 201 of IPC. After completion of investigation, police filed charge-sheet in this matter for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 201 and 376-D of IPC. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. It is submitted that entire prosecution case is based on circumstantial evidence and there are no incriminating circumstances appearing against the petitioner. Learned counsel argues that admittedly, no weapon has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner. [2025:RJ-JP:43847] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-13767/2025] He contends that trial of the case will take considerable time in its conclusion. He further contends that the petitioner, who is a female, is in custody since 05.06.2024 and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that second bail application of the petitioner was dismissed on merit and there is no substantial change in the circumstances. 4. I have considered the contentions. 5. This second bail application of the petitioner was dismissed on merits and there is no substantial change in the circumstances. Thus, having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties and considering the role attributed to the petitioner, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. 6. Accordingly, this third bail application is dismissed. 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 MADAN/55