[2025:RJ-JP:5773] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 13737/2023 Smt. Shimladevi S/o Late Shri Harlal Meena, R/o Bajrang Colony, Kajipura Kekdi, Police Station Kekdi City, District Ajmer. (Petitioner Is In Judicial Custody In District Jail Ajmer). ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through PP 2. Mukesh S/o Gopal Nath, R/o Jamoli, Tehsil Jhahajpur, Police Station Pander, District Bhilwara (Raj.). ----Respondents Connected With S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 1711/2024 Premraj Meena S/o Kesra Meena, Aged About 24 Years, R/o Audiya Kheda, P.s. Pander, District Bhilwara, Raj. (At Present In Central Jail Ajmer). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Second Bail Application No. 2056/2024 Lokendra Kumar Meena S/o Sukhdev Meena, Aged About 22 Years, Resident Of Bodiya Kheda, Police Station Pander, District Bhilwara (Rajasthan) (At Present In Sub Jail Kekri, Ajmer) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Aryaveer Singh Mr. Sunil Tyagi with Mr. Buddhi Prakash Meena For Respondent(s) : Ms. Arti Sharma, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 10/02/2025 1. These instant bail applications have been filed under Section 483 of BNSS, on behalf of the petitioners, who have been arrested [2025:RJ-JP:5773] (2 of 4) [CRLMB-13737/2023] in connection with FIR No.130/2023 registered at Police Station Kekdi City, District Ajmer (Raj.) for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 201, 120B & 34 of IPC. Later on, police filed charge- sheet in this matter for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 201, 120B & 34 of IPC. 2. First bail application of petitioner Lokendra Kumar Meena was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to renew the prayer of bail after recording the testimony of witnesses Mukeshnath, Kajodnath, Pinki Nath and Investigating Officer of this case. Now, aforesaid four witnesses and medical expert who conducted the post-mortem of the deceased have been examined during the course of trial. Thus, this second bail application has been preferred on behalf of petitioner Lokendra Kumar Meena. 3. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that the accused-petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel submits that admittedly there is no eye-witness of the alleged incident and it is alleged in the FIR that when complainant/FIR lodger called his father at about 2.43 pm through phone, he was informed by his father that he has been brutally beaten up by the petitioners in their house and on this information, he reached at the place of incident which is the house of petitioner Shimladevi wherein his father was found in an injured condition and petitioner Shimladevi was cleaning the floor and petitioners Premraj Meena & Lokendra Kumar Meena were cleaning their blood stained hands. It is submitted that the complainant immediately rushed his father to the hospital where he was declared dead. It is submitted that neither any blood [2025:RJ-JP:5773] (3 of 4) [CRLMB-13737/2023] stained cloths nor any mop which was allegedly used by petitioner Shimladevi have been recovered at the instance of petitioners. Counsel further submit that it has also been admitted by the medical expert that it cannot be rule out that injuries sustained to the deceased can be on account of road accident. Counsel submit that six witnesses are yet to be examined. Petitioners are in custody since April 2023 and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. Further custody of the petitioners would not serve any fruitful purpose. 4. Learned State Counsel opposes the submissions made by counsel for the petitioners. She submits that incident has been proved by the witnesses namely Mukeshnath, Kajodnath & Pinki Nath and there is no material change in circumstances after rejection of first bail application of petitioner- Lokendra Kumar Meena. 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 petitioners, especially the material available on record in the form of charge-sheet as well as statement of the witnesses recorded during the course of trial; absence of criminal antecedents; looking to the custody period, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it proper to allow these bail applications. 7. These bail applications are accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioners (1) Smt. Shimladevi S/o Late Shri Harlal Meena, (2) Premraj Meena S/o Kesra Meena & [2025:RJ-JP:5773] (4 of 4) [CRLMB-13737/2023] (3) Lokendra Kumar Meena S/o Sukhdev Meena shall be released on bail provided each of them 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 they 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 herein above are only for decision of these instant bail applications and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J LALIT MOHAN /31-33