[2025:RJ-JP:44871] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Misc. 4th Bail Application No. 9003/2025 Bachan Singh Bairwa S/o Shri Govindram @ Govinda, Aged About 26 Years, R/o Khankhar, Police Station Kherli, District Alwar (Raj.) (At Present In District Jail Alwar). ----Petitioner Versus State of Rajasthan, through Public Prosecutor. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Aman Pareek Mr. B.R. Jat Mr. P.P. Dhoyal For Respondent(s) : Mr. Tapesh Agarwal, PP Mr. Satish Kumar, for complainant HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA Order 10/11/2025 1. This fourth bail application has been filed by the accused petitioner under Section 483 of the B.N.S.S. arising out of F.I.R. No.145/2024 registered at Police Station Kherli, District Alwar for offence under Sections 143, 323, 341, 307 & 504 of IPC. 2. Learned counsel for the accused-petitioner submits that even after repeated summons by the trial Court so also the arrest warrants of certain prosecution witnesses, they are not turning up for evidence. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor submits that the prosecution witnesses are not available at their residence. 4. Learned counsel for the complainant submits that they will get examine the prosecution witnesses on the next date. [2025:RJ-JP:44871] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-9003/2025] 5. Considered the submissions made at bar and perused the material available on record including the affidavit filed by the SHO of concerned police station during pendency of this bail application. 6. The accused-petitioner is in custody since 23.06.2024 and out of total 26 prosecution witnesses only two have been examined so far and out of that two also, evidence of one of the prosecution witness named Kamal is incomplete. As per the affidavit submitted by the SHO during pendency of this bail application, the prosecution witnesses were not found available at their residence when they tried to serve summons for their evidence. 7. Learned counsel for the complainant submits that they will get examine the prosecution witnesses on the next coming date, however he is not in a position to give explanation for not turning up the prosecution witnesses so far even after issuance of summons by the trial Court. 8. The accused-petitioner is in custody since 23.06.2024 and speedy trial is a right of accused as enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. 9. Taking into consideration the overall facts and circumstances of the case and more particularly the fact that accused-petitioner is in custody since 23.06.2024 and the prosecution witnesses are not turning up for evidence and till date only two out of total 26 prosecution witnesses have been examined, therefore, this Court, without expressing any opinion on merits and demerits of the case, deems just and proper to enlarge the accused petitioner on [2025:RJ-JP:44871] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-9003/2025] bail. 10. Accordingly, this fourth bail application is allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner shall be released on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lac only) together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) each to the satisfaction of the trial Court with the stipulation that he shall appear before the trial Court or any other Court to which the matter is transferred, on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so. (GANESH RAM MEENA),J Gaurav Srivastava/1