[2025:RJ-JP:10572] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 3269/2025 Sandeep Kumar S/o Chhotu Ram, Aged About 28 Years, Ro Village Khojas Police Station Gothra District Jhunjhunu. (Presently Confined In District Jail Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Madhusudan Singh Rajpurohit For Respondent(s) : Ms. Arti Sharma, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 07/03/2025 1. The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.181/2023 registered at Police Station Mukundgarh, District Jhunjhunu for the offences under Sections 450, 302 & 34 of IPC. Later on, police filed charge-sheet for offences punishable under Sections 302 & 34 of IPC. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Learned counsel submits that both eye witnesses, namely, Vinit and Vidhyadhar have been examined as PW-1 and PW-3. It is submitted that injured eye witness Vinit has not supported the prosecution case and has been declared hostile. It appears from the testimony of another witness Vidhyadhar that there is no specific allegation against the petitioner to cause injury on the [2025:RJ-JP:10572] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-3269/2025] person of deceased. Learned counsel contends that other co- accused Kishor @ Jhandu has been granted bail by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court and co-accused Shrawan has been granted bail by learned trial court. It is contended that petitioner has no criminal antecedents and he is in custody since 30.08.2023. Further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. Charge-sheet has been filed and trial will take time in its conclusion. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor oppose the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. She submits that presence of petitioner at the place of incident is well established from the evidence of prosecution witness Vidhyadhar. 4. I have considered the contentions. 5. 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 considering the fact that both co-accused persons have been granted bail; petitioner has no criminal antecedents; charge-sheet has been filed and trial will take time in its conclusion, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it proper to allow the bail application. 6. This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner - Sandeep Kumar S/o Chhotu Ram, 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 [2025:RJ-JP:10572] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-3269/2025] 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. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J CHARU SONI /195