[2026:RJ-JP:4064] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 1626/2026 1. Ramjas son of Badrilal, aged 29 years, resident of Village Luhara, Police Station Newai-Sadar, District Tonk (Ra- jasthan) (At present lodged in District Jail, Tonk). 2. Ganesh son of Badrilal, aged 34 years, resident of Village Luhara, Police Station Newai-Sadar, District Tonk (Ra- jasthan) (At present lodged in District Jail, Tonk). ----Petitioners Versus State of Rajasthan, through the Public Prosecutor. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ashvin Garg For Respondent(s) : Mr. Amit Punia, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 29/01/2026 1. This bail application under Section 483 of BNSS has been filed on behalf of the petitioners, who have been arrested in connection with FIR No.128/2024 registered at Police Station Niwai Sadar, District Tonk (Raj.) for offences punishable under Sections 189(2), 126(2) & 103(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, (in short ‘BNS’) 2023. After completion of investigation, police filed charge-sheet in this case for offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 103(1) & 3(5) of the BNS, 2023. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel submits that according to the investigating agency, there were three eye-witnesses of the incident namely, Ramrai, Surgyan & [2026:RJ-JP:4064] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-1626/2026] Raichand. Counsel submits that aforementioned eye-witnesses have been examined during the course of trial as PW-7, PW-8 & PW-12, respectively and they have not supported the prosecution case therefore, they have been declared hostile by the prosecution. Counsel submits that though, complainant has claimed himself to be an eye-witness of the incident but bare perusal of his testimony would reveal that he received the information from his nephew and this fact has been admitted by him in his cross-examination. Counsel submits that according to the impugned order, there are no criminal antecedents against the petitioners and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. Counsel submits that petitioner Ramjas is in custody since 18.07.2024 whereas petitioner Ganesh is in custody since 19.07.2024 and further custody of the petitioners would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions advanced on behalf of the petitioners however, he fairly concedes that the aforementioned eye-witnesses have not supported the prosecution case and they have been declared hostile. 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 petitioners, especially considering the material available on record in the form of charge-sheet, as also the fact that aforementioned eye-witnesses have not supported the prosecution case and they have been declared hostile, so also the fact that according to the impugned order, there are no criminal [2026:RJ-JP:4064] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-1626/2026] antecedents against the petitioners and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion 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. 6. The bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioners- (1) Ramjas son of Badrilal and (2) Ganesh son of Badrilal shall be released on bail provided each of them furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court with the stipulation that they 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. 7. The observations made hereinabove are only for decision of the bail application and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J LALIT MOHAN /147