[2025:RJ-JP:24869] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous IIIrd Bail Application No. 1228/2025 Krishna Kumar Meena S/o Kajodmal Meena, Aged About 21 Years, R/o Deoli, Tehsil Lalsot, Police Station Lalsot, District Dausa (Rajasthan) (At Present In Central Jail, Jaipur) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent Connected With S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous IInd Bail Application No. 3482/2025 Vijay Meena S/o Late Shri Ganpat Lal Meena, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Chowkidaron Ki Dhani, Deoli, Tehsil Lalsot, Dausa, Rajasthan. (At Present Confined In District Jail Dausa.) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Raghuraj Singh Rajawat Mr. Lakhan Singh Meena For Respondent(s) : Mr. Tapesh Agarwal, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL Order 07/07/2025 1. These bail applications have been filed by accused- petitioners Krishna Kumar Meena & Vijay Meena, under Section 483 of BNSS in connection with FIR No.131/2023 registered at Police Station Shivdaspura, District Jaipur City (South) for offence(s) under Sections 302, 364, 201, 120B IPC and Section 4/2025 of the Arms Act. [2025:RJ-JP:24869] (2 of 4) [CRLMB-1228/2025] 2. It has been argued that petitioners are in custody since 28.02.2023, after rejection of first bail application, only seven prosecution witnesses including the complainant, relative and police Constables of seizure memo have been recorded by the prosecution, the case of based on circumstantial evidence and there is no eye witness of the incident nor petitioners are named in the FIR; petitioners have been implicated in the present criminal case for murder of one Rakesh Meena on the basis of circumstantial evidence; one knife has been alleged to be recovered on information of accused-petitioner Vijay Meena, which is after a long period of time and on the information of accused Dilkhush Meena, one mobile phone was recovered; except such, there are no evidence against accused-petitioners; PW1 & PW2 have turned hostile; there are no criminal antecedents of petitioners and petitioners are languishing in jail since long without proving any guilt and the criminal trial is also not proceedings further, which is in violation to the legal rights of petitioners for expeditious trial and since the trial is being delayed by the prosecution, the fundamental right of life and liberty of petitioners envisaged under Article 21 of the Constitution of India is being violated. A reference of the recent order dated 09.09.2024, passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP (Crl.) No.8523/2024 titled as Balwinder Singh vs. State of Punjab, releasing the accused on bail due to non-conclusion of trial despite issuing directions that same is to be concluded within a period of five months, has [2025:RJ-JP:24869] (3 of 4) [CRLMB-1228/2025] been given. Therefore, in such circumstances, petitioners be released on bail. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application and submits that out of 18 witness, 7 prosecution witnesses have been examined, however, he does not dispute that the evidence against petitioners is circumstantial evidence and the complainant and his relatives PW1 and PW2 have turned hostile. 4. Heard learned counsel for both parties and perused the material available on record as also the status report submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor. 5. Having considered the overall facts and circumstances and that petitioners have been implicated in the present case on account of hatching a conspiracy of murder of one Rakesh Meena whose wife was allegedly in illicit relationship with Krishna Kumar Meena. Wife of Rakesh Meena namely Phoola @ Pooja Meena was also arrested but she has already been released by this Court vide order dated 30.11.2023 in S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 12031/2023; Petitioners have been implicated on the basis of information of recovery of knife and mobile; there are no criminal antecedents of petitioners nor petitioners are named in the FIR; prosecution has failed to pursue the trial of criminal case in speedy manner, which obviously tantamount to violating the legal rights of petitioners for speedy trial; petitioners are in custody since 28.02.2023, their fundamental rights of life and liberty envisaged under Article 21 of the Constitution of India is also being infringed and further taking guidance of the judgment passed in Balwinder Singh (supra), but without commenting on [2025:RJ-JP:24869] (4 of 4) [CRLMB-1228/2025] merits of the case, this Court deems it just and proper to release petitioners on bail. 6. Accordingly, these bail applications are allowed and it is ordered that accused-petitioners 1.Krishna Kumar Meena S/o Kajodmal Meena & 2. Vijay Meena S/o Late Shri Ganpat Lal Meena shall be released on bail provided, they furnish a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- each with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for their appearance before the Court concerned on all the dates of hearing as and when called upon to do so. 7. However, in addition to the usual terms and conditions, it is hereby directed that: (i) Accused-petitioners shall extend full cooperation with the commencement and conclusion of trial and shall not leave District Jaipur without prior permission of the trial Court. (ii) Accused-petitioners shall not induce or influence or tamper with any prosecution evidence/witness. (iii) Accused-Petitioners shall not repeat the similar nature of offence. (iv) In case, accused-petitioners are found involved in similar offence, during bail granted by this Court or breach of conditions is reported or come to the notice of the Court, the same shall be a reason for the trial Court to cancel the bail, granted by this Court. (SUDESH BANSAL),J NITIN /1-2