[2026:RJ-JP:1157] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Second Bail Application No. 10808/2025 Arjun Lal S/o Shri Badrinarayan, Aged About 23 Years, R/o Diler (Dhaler), Police Station Raysar, District Jaipur Rural (Raj.) (Presently Confined In Central Jail Alwar). ----Applicant Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Aatish Jain, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rhishi Raj Singh Rathore, PP with Mr. Shree Ram Dhakad, Adv. Mr. Nemsingh Gurjar, Adv. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN Order 12/01/2026 1. This second bail application has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS on behalf of accused-applicant. The accused-applicant was arrested in connection with FIR No. 185/2023 registered at Police Station Pratapgarh, District Alwar for the offence(s) under Section 302 of IPC. 2. Learned counsel for the accused-applicant submits that there is change in circumstance, therefore, the present bail application is moved. It is submitted that the first bail application was rejected on 06.12.2023 and that the applicant is aged about 23 years who is behind the bars from a period exceeding two years and six months. It is submitted that the case of applicant is at the same pedestal that of co-accused Khemchand, whose bail appeal has been allowed by the Apex Court on 17.12.2025. [2026:RJ-JP:1157] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-10808/2025] 3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor and counsel for the complainant have vehemently opposed the bail application. It is submitted that while allowing the appeal of co-accused i.e. Khemchand, the Apex Court has made specific observation that allegation against the applicant is that he facilitated the other accused to commit the offence. It is submitted that the case of present applicant is at a different pedestal and as there were 29 calls on the date of incidence by the applicant. It is further submitted that Khemchand was not found to be located as per the CDR. It is next submitted that the present applicant has made calls to the victim/now deceased, with a motive to call him at the place of incidence, which distinguishes the case from Khemchand. 4. Considering overall circumstances, facts of the case and the reasoning given in order dated 06.12.2023, the fact that the instant applicant has a distinguishable stance as from the co- accused - Khemchand, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the applicant on bail. 5. Accordingly, the present bail application is dismissed. (SAMEER JAIN),J CHANDAN /149