[2026:RJ-JP:30933] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 5th Bail Application No. 12309/2026 CNR: RJHC020752362026 | URN: CRLMB / 22654U / 2026 Dhanwan @ Monu Son Of Satish, Aged About 31 Years, Resident Of Jatwada Khurd, Police Station Mantown, District Sawai Mad- hopur. ( At Present In District Jail Sawai Madhopur) ----Petitioner Versus The State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Shyam Bihari Gautam For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 07/08/2026 1. This fifth bail application under Section 483 of BNSS has been filed on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.251/2024 registered at Police Station Mantown, District Sawai Madhopur (Raj.) for the offences punishable under Sections 140(1), 142, 103(1) & 3(5) of BNS. After completion of investigation, police filed charge-sheet in this matter. 2. The first and third bail applications filed on behalf of the petitioner were dismissed on merits by this Court vide order dated 28.02.2025 and 23.07.2025, respectively. Now, this fifth bail application has been preferred by the petitioner. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. He submits that it appears [2026:RJ-JP:30933] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-12309/2026] from the testimony of Investigating Officer that petitioner was not involved in commission of crime and he was not with the deceased when he was lastly seen by the police constable. It is contended that after dismissal of the first bail application only three witnesses have been examined, trial is proceeding in a snail's pace manner and will take considerable time in its conclusion. Counsel further contends that petitioner is in custody since 24.07.2024 and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose, therefore, the instant fifth bail application may be allowed. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner. He submits that by a detailed order, first and third bail applications of the petitioner were dismissed and after rejection of the bail applications, there has been no substantial change in circumstances to entertain this fifth bail application therefore, the bail application may be dismissed. 5. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the arguments advanced at bar, as also considering the material available on record in the form of charge-sheet including testimony of Investigating Officer as well as police personnel namely Arvind Kumar who lastly saw the deceased in the company of the petitioner and two others at about 12:30 AM and after two hours, he received the information that one dead body has been found near the Hotel Ram Shyam, which was identified as of deceased so also the fact that, there exists no change in circumstances which warrants interference of this Court, [2026:RJ-JP:30933] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-12309/2026] thus, looking to the nature and gravity of offence, I do not find it a fit case to enlarge the petitioner on bail. 6. Accordingly, this fifth bail application is dismissed. 7. The observations 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 GAUTAM JAIN/8