[2025:RJ-JP:6251] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 2131/2025 1. Chaganlal S/o Kajodilal, Aged About 52 Years, R/o Kotada Jagir, P.s Ghatoli Presently At Pawan Chowk Nai Basti Aklera, P.s. Aklera, Dist. Jhalawar 2. Bholaram S/o Chaganlal, Aged About 20 Years, R/o Rawan Chowk Nai Basti Aklera, P.s Aklera, Dist. Jhalawar 3. Dropti Bai @ Dropdi Bai W/o Chaganlal, Aged About 44 Years, R/o Kotada Jagir, P.s Ghatoli Presently At Rawan Chowk Nai Basti Aklera, P.s. Aklera, Dist. Jhalawar. (At Present Confined In District Jail Jhalawar) ----Petitioners Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Amit Dhadhich For Respondent(s) : Mr. Jai Prakash Tiwari, PP Ms. Arti Sharma, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 12/02/2025 1. Counsel for the petitioners seeks permission to withdraw the instant bail application qua accused-petitioner No.2 namely Bholaram S/o Chaganlal. 2. Permission sought for is granted. 3. Accordingly, this bail application stands dismissed as withdrawn qua accused-petitioner No.2 namely Bholaram S/o Chaganlal. 4. So far as petitioner Nos. 1 and 3 are concerned. They have filed the instant bail application under Section 483 BNSS, in [2025:RJ-JP:6251] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-2131/2025] connection with FIR No.455/2024 registered at Police Station Aklera, District Jhalawar (Raj.) for the offences punishable under Sections 189(2), 115(2), 352, 109(2) & 126(2) of BNS. Later on, police filed charge-sheet in this matter for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1), 191(2), 190 & 352 of BNS. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel submits that it appears from the FIR and statement of eye-witnesses that head injury was caused by the co-accused namely Bholaram and Raju. According to the post-mortem report, cause of death is head injury. Counsel submits that alleged incident took place on 07.09.2024 and deceased passed away on 01.10.2024. Counsel submits that possibility of medical negligence in treatment cannot be ruled out. Counsel further submits that there are no criminal antecedents of the petitioners. Charge sheet has already been filed and trial will take considerable time. Petitioners are in custody since their date of arrest and further custody of the petitioners would not serve any fruitful purpose. 6. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by counsel for the petitioners. It is submitted that petitioners are named in the FIR and they have actively participated in commission of crime. It is further submitted that five injuries have been found on the person of the deceased. 7. I have considered the contentions. 8. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioners, as also the fact that cause of death is head [2025:RJ-JP:6251] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-2131/2025] injury and allegation of causing head injury to deceased has been attributed to co-accused namely Bholaram and Raju; charge-sheet has been filed and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion; absence of criminal antecedents of the petitioners 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 this bail application. 9. This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner 1. Chaganlal S/o Kajodilal & 2. Dropti Bai @ Dropdi Bai W/o Chaganlal 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. 10. 10. The observation made hereinabove is only for decision of the instant bail application and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN), J MAHIMA/87