[2025:RJ-JP:42548] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 12994/2025 Vijaypal S/o Shree Ganeshram, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Chelasi, Police Station Sadar Sikar, District Sikar Rajasthan. (At Present Confined In Sub Jail, Fatehpur District Sikar Rajasthan). ----Petitioner Versus The State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Dr. Parmindra Dadhich For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP with Mr. Tapesh Agarwal, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 16/10/2025 1. This second bail application has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.186/2024 registered at Police Station Lakshmangarh (Sikar), District Sikar (Rajasthan) for offences punishable under Sections 190, 140(1), 103(1) & 61(2)(a) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, (in short ‘BNS’) 2023. After completion of investigation, police filed charge-sheet in this matter. 2. The first bail application filed on behalf of the petitioner was dismissed as withdrawn by this Court vide order dated 03.09.2025 while giving liberty to renew the prayer for bail after recording testimony of witness namely- Vijay Pal S/o Parturam and medical expert who conducted post-mortem of the deceased. Now, both the aforesaid witnesses have been examined during the course of trial thus, this second bail application has been preferred. 3. Learned counsel submits that bare perusal of the testimony of aforesaid witnesses would reveal that false case has been instituted against the petitioner. Counsel submits that petitioner is brother-in- [2025:RJ-JP:42548] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-12994/2025] law (Saala) of the deceased. It is submitted that allegation of kidnapping and murder has been levelled against the petitioner solely on the basis of the fact that relation between the petitioner and deceased were strained as deceased used to harass sister of the petitioner (wife of the deceased). Counsel submits that brother of the deceased namely- Vijay Pal S/o Parturam has not reiterated the story narrated by the complainant in the FIR. Counsel submits that medical expert who conducted the post-mortem of the deceased has categorically deposed that injuries found on the person of the deceased are not sufficient to cause death. Counsel submits that co-accused namely- Rajesh and Narendra Kumar have already been granted benefit of bail by this Court. It is contended that there are no criminal antecedents against the petitioner and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. Counsel submits that petitioner is in custody from past one year and his further incarceration would serve no useful purpose, especially since trial is likely to take considerable time in its conclusion. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner. He submits that ample evidence is available on record against the petitioner and petitioner is named in the FIR and case of the petitioner is distinguishable from the co- accused persons who have been granted benefit of bail by this Court. 5. I have considered the contentions. 6. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, especially considering the material available on [2025:RJ-JP:42548] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-12994/2025] record in the form of charge-sheet, as also the fact that witness namely Vijay Pal S/o Parturam has not reiterated the story narrated by the complainant in the FIR, so also considering the fact that according to the testimony of medical expert, injuries found on the person of the deceased are not sufficient to cause death, aforementioned co-accused persons have already been granted benefit of bail by this court, there are no criminal antecedents against the petitioner and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion as well as looking to the period of custody, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it fit and proper to allow the second bail application. 7. This second bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner -Vijaypal S/o Shree Ganeshram shall be released on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court with the stipulation that he shall appear before that Court and any court to which the matter is transferred, on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so. 8. The observations made hereinabove are only for decision of the bail application and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J LALIT MOHAN /8