[2025:RJ-JP:7064] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Second Bail Application No. 2480/2025 Manish Kumar Meena S/o Sitaram, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Kishanlal Ka Pura, Majra Badapur, Police Station Sarmathura, District Dholpur (Raj.). (Presently Confined In District Jail, Dholpur). ----Accused-Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Avtar Singh Rathore, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Manvendra Singh, PP, Ms. Arti Sharma, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 18/02/2025 1. The instant 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.405/2023 registered at Police Station Sarmathura, District Dholpur for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 302 and 364 of IPC. Later on, Police filed charge-sheet in this matter for the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC. 2. The first bail application of the petitioner was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to renew the prayer of bail after recording testimony of witness namely- ‘V’, who last saw the petitioner in company of the deceased. Now, the aforesaid witness has been examined during the course of trial and she has not supported the [2025:RJ-JP:7064] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-2480/2025] prosecution case and has been declared hostile. Thus, this second bail application has been preferred on behalf of the petitioner. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. It is submitted that FIR has been registered in this case on the basis of information furnished by witness- Namo Narayan Meena. It has been alleged in the FIR that four persons including petitioner came in the house of the deceased and abducted her but said version has not been supported by the aforesaid witness in his statement recorded under section 161 Cr.PC. In these circumstances, it was concluded by the Investigating Agency that entire prosecution case is based on circumstantial evidence. It is submitted that charge-sheet has been filed against the petitioner only on the basis of the fact that he was the last person who was seen with the deceased. It is submitted that witness namely- ‘V’ was examined during the course of trial and she has not supported the prosecution case and has been declared hostile. There are no criminal antecedents against the petitioner. Charge-sheet has already been filed and trial of the case will take considerable time in its conclusion. Counsel further submits that till date, only 2 witnesses have been examined out of 22 cited prosecution witnesses. Petitioner is in custody since 16.12.2023 and 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. [2025:RJ-JP:7064] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-2480/2025] 6. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner as also looking to the fact that entire prosecution case is based on circumstantial evidence and last seen witness has been declared hostile; charge-sheet has been filed and trial will take time in its conclusion; absence of criminal antecedents against the petitioner as well as looking to the custody period, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it proper to allow the bail application. 7. This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner - Manish Kumar Meena S/o Sitaram 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 observation made herein above 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 MADAN/44