[2025:RJ-JP:44700] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Second Bail Application No. 12931/2025 Ummedi Kanwar W/o Kalyan Singh, Aged About 72 Years, R/o Peelwa, Police Station, Balghat, Presently R/o Village Dob, Police Station, Rahuwas, District Dausa (Rajasthan) (The Accused Petitioner Presently Confined In Sub Jail, Hindaun City, District Karauli) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajneesh Gupta with Mr. Rahul Sharma & Mr. Shiv Kumar Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Tapesh Agarwal, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 07/11/2025 1. This second bail application under Section 483 of BNSS has been filed on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.92/2001 registered at Police Station Todabhim, District Karauli, Rajasthan for offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 307, 302 & 447 of IPC. 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 The first bail application filed on behalf of the petitioner was dismissed as withdrawn by this court vide order dated 13.08.2025 while giving liberty to renew the prayer for bail after recording testimony of eye-witnesses. Now, eye-witnesses has been [2025:RJ-JP:44700] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-12931/2025] examined during the course of trial thus, this second bail application has been preferred. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel submits that complainant namely- Balbeer and injured eye-witnesses have been examined during the course of trial wherein they have not supported the prosecution case and they have been declared hostile. Counsel submits that three other eye-witnesses, namely- Bachan Singh, Vishan & Damodar have expired therefore, their testimony could not be recorded. It is submitted that trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. Counsel submits that petitioner is a lady, aged about 72 years and she is in custody since 04.04.2025. Further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner. 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 fact that complainant and injured eye-witnesses have been examined during the course of trial wherein they have not supported the prosecution case and they have been declared hostile, as also considering the fact that petitioner is a lady, aged about 72 years 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 [2025:RJ-JP:44700] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-12931/2025] allow the second bail application. 7. This second bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner Ummedi Kanwar W/o Kalyan Singh shall be released on bail provided she 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 she 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 /53