[2026:RJ-JP:26550] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 5039/2026 URN: CRLMB / 9040U / 2026 Vijay Singh S/o Gopal, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Village Tontpura, Police Station Sapotra, District Karauli (Raj.). (At Present Confined In Central Jail Bharatpur). ----Accused-Petitioner Versus The State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pallav Jhalani For State For Respondent(s) : : Mr. Naresh Gupta, PP Mr. Timan Singh HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIPIN GUPTA Judgment / Order 14/07/2026 1. The present bail application has been filed under Section 483 BNSS, 2023 against the order dated 19.02.2026 passed by learned Sessions Judge, District-Karauli, in Bail Application No.77/2026, whereby the bail application of the petitioner was rejected in connection with F.I.R. No. 309/2025, Police Station- Sapotra, District-Karauli for the offences under Sections 103(1), 115(2), 126(2), 352, 118(1) & 3(5) of BNS, 2023. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the FIR. He further submits that no injury of causing death to the two persons namely Ramjilal & Pinki have been attributed to the petitioner. He further submits that co- accused namely Manbhar has already been enlarged on bail by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, in S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous [2026:RJ-JP:26550] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-5039/2026] Bail Application No.4156/2026 vide order dated 19.03.2026. Learned counsel for the petitioner also drew attention of this Court towards the statement recorded under Section 180 BNS, 2023 as well as the injury and the post mortem reports. Therefore, he prays that he may enlarged on bail. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the respondent/complainant opposes the bail application and submits that the serious offence of murder in the broad-day-light has been committed by the accused-petitioner alongwith the other co-accused, therefore, the bail application may be rejected. 5. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the respondent/complainant and perused the material available on record. 6. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and upon consideration of the FIR, the statement recorded under Section 180 of BNS, 2023 as well as the nature of the injuries and further considering the fact that two persons have been sustained fatel injuries and have died in the broad-day-light, the petitioner having been named in the FIR as well as in the statement recorded under Section 180 BNS, 2023 attributing injuries on the deceased. 7. At this stage, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. So far as the argument of learned counsel for the petitioner is that Manbhar has already been enlarged on bail. This Court finds that the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, has taken into consideration the fact that Manbhar being a lady and there being no active participation of causing injury by Manbhar except catching one of the injured Kavita. This Court finds that the [2026:RJ-JP:26550] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-5039/2026] case of the petitioner is totally distinguishable from the case of the co-accused Manbhar. Hence, the benefit of bail cannot be granted to the petitioner as granted to the Manbhar, on that count also, this Court is of the opinion that the bail application deserves to be rejected. 8. Accordingly, the present criminal miscellaneous bail application is hereby, dismissed. (BIPIN GUPTA),J 7/MAHIMA