[2026:RJ-JP:3304] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 976/2026 Pankaj S/o Harishchandra, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Ramnagar, Police Station Kumher, District Deeg. (Presently In Judicial Custody At District Jail, Deeg). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Neha Chaudhary for Mr. Shashwat Purohit For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vivek Sharma, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAMIL KUMAR MATHUR Order 23/01/2026 1. The petitioner has preferred this bail application under Section 483 of BNSS in FIR No.515/2025 registered at Police Station-Kumher, District-Deeg for the offences under Sections 189(2) and 103(1) of BNS. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Public Prosecutor and perused the material available on record. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. She further submits that the FIR has been lodged at the instance of the complainant, Gopalsingh, who, as per the contents of the FIR itself, is not an eye-witness to the incident. It is submitted that the prosecution case is based entirely on circumstantial evidence and that none of the witnesses have stated anything incriminating to establish the involvement of the present petitioner. It is further submitted that [2026:RJ-JP:3304] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-976/2026] no recovery has been effected from the present petitioner. Petitioner is behind the bars since 26.08.2025. The trial of the case may take considerable time, hence the bail application of the petitioner may be allowed. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application and submitted that the name of the petitioner is mentioned in the FIR. Though the case of the prosecution is based on circumstantial evidence but the statements of witnesses Ramu and Chetram recorded during the course of investigation clearly establish the presence of the petitioner at the scene of occurrence as a “last seen”. He further submits that ample material is available on record which reflects the presence of the accused at the spot and his involvement in the murder of deceased Mahesh Chand. Therefore, bail application of the petitioner is liable to be rejected. 5. On consideration of the rival submissions and the material available on record, and having deliberated upon all the facts and circumstances of the case, especially in backdrop of the arguments advanced by learned Public Prosecutor and the fact that the presence of the petitioner is reflected on the spot from the perusal of the FIR and in the statements recorded during investigation but without expressing any opinion on the merits or demerits of the case, this Court is not inclined to allow the present bail application filed by the petitioner. 6. Hence, the present bail application is hereby dismissed. (PRAMIL KUMAR MATHUR),J Arun/107