[2025:RJ-JP:43761] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal 2nd Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 14104/2025 Iesar Singh Gurjar S/o Shri Dharmi Gurjar, R/o Gadh Police Station Rajgarh, District Alwar. (Presently Confined At Central Jail Alwar). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kapil Gupta with Mr. Dharmendra Kumar, Ms. Anisha Yadav and Mr. Sushil Yadav For Respondent(s) : Mr. Manvendra Singh Choudhary, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN Order 31/10/2025 1. The second bail application under Section 483 of BNSS is filed by the applicant-accused Iesar Singh Gurjar S/o Shri Dharmi Gurjar seeking bail in respect of a criminal case registered as FIR No.190/2024 dated 02.05.2024 registered at P.S. Malakheda, District - Alwar, for the offence under Sections 143, 302 and 120B IPC. The first bail application of petitioner along with Taufiq Khan @ Rahil was dismissed on 06.08.2025 2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the matter and the investigation against him is complete and he is no more required in investigation. He further submits that there are no chance of fleeing of applicant accused from the [2025:RJ-JP:43761] (2 of 4) [CRLMB-14104/2025] jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court. The applicant does not have any criminal antecedents. He also submits that the applicant undertakes not to repeat offence and cooperate with investigation/trial, which will take time. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that after recording of statement of four witnesses, the bail application of Taufiq Khan was allowed by this Court on 18.10.2025. He further submitted that the case of petitioner is identical with Taufiq. He further submitted that complaint is registered by PW-3 Damodar Choudhary as if he is an eye-witness but in cross- examination, he admits that at the time of incident, he was at home. He further submitted that as per PW-3 there were two other eye-witnesses and both Badlu and Subhash were not arrayed as an eye-witness. He further submitted that police has not filed charge-sheet on the basis of circumstantial evidence rather filed a charge-sheet presuming to be a case based on eye-witness. He further submitted that the role and involvement of present petitioner is not proved from any of the material evidence recorded so far. At last, he submitted that petitioner is in custody since 13.05.2024 and some of the co-accused have already been granted bail. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application and submitted that the allegations are grave and serious in nature. 5. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner-accused and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material placed on record by both the parties. [2025:RJ-JP:43761] (3 of 4) [CRLMB-14104/2025] 6. The first bail application was dismissed on merits on 06.08.2025. Thereafter second bail application is preferred by Taufiq after recording statement of 4 witnesses including PW-3 Damodar Choudhary, who is complainant and father of deceased. This Court has granted bail to Taufiq on 08.10.2025. The material clearly indicated that the report is registered as if Damodar is an eye-witness but while recording statement as PW-3 before the trial court, he has admitted that at the time of incident, he was at home. Further he named Subhash and Badlu as an eye-witness, who witnessed the incident from 200 metres. We have considered admission of PW-3 in cross-examination and also the fact that the petitioner is in custody since 13.05.2024. The circumstances mentioned in charge-sheet indicted that at the time of incident as Sunil Gurjar was driving the vehicle and he hit the bike of deceased, which resulted into death of deceased. Main accused Sunil Gurjar is still absconding and not arrested by police. While considering bail application of Taufiq, we have considered the fact that PW-3 has not named Taufiq in his statement but the cross-examination of PW-3 clearly suggested that two eye-witnesses were not named by police in the charge-sheet. 7. Upon hearing the arguments and perusing the record, we have found that the applicant-accused is no more required in the investigation and he is in custody for quite some time. The further proceedings will take its own time, therefore, looking to entirety of facts and circumstances of the case and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, [2025:RJ-JP:43761] (4 of 4) [CRLMB-14104/2025] the Court deems it appropriate to grant bail to the applicant- accused. 8. Thus, the second bail application filed on behalf of applicant- accused Iesar Singh Gurjar S/o Shri Dharmi Gurjar, is hereby allowed and the applicant-accused is ordered to be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond of ₹50,000/- with two sureties of like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant-accused shall not tamper with evidence or influence the witness in any manner. (ii) The applicant-accused shall not indulge in any criminal activity and shall not repeat any criminal offence punishable under the Law. (iii) The applicant-accused shall attend the hearing of the Trial Court on the date fixed by the Trial court or as and when asked to appear before the Trial Court. (iv) In case of any violation of above conditions, the bail granted to the applicant-accused shall be liable to be canceled. 9. The Registry is directed to send a copy of this order to the Trial Court through E-mail. (ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J PREETI VALECHA /28