[2026:RJ-JP:2677] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 12256/2025 Rambilas S/o Shri Laxminarayan, R/o Sankheda, Police Station Ramganjmandi, District Kota Rural (Raj.). (At Present Lodge At Sub Jail Ramganjmandi, District Kota) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Avinash Dhanju, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Amit Punia, PP Mr. Dinesh Kumar Garg, Adv. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 21/01/2026 1. The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS, on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.376/2022 registered at Police Station Ramganjmandi, District Kota for offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 307, 382 IPC. After completion of investigation, Police filed charge-sheet in this matter before the concerned Court for offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 325, 307, 427, 302, 396 & 120B IPC. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel submits that there is lack of material evidence to connect the present petitioner with the alleged crime. It is submitted that the testimony of material witnesses including the complainant and injured Vishnu has already been recorded before the trial Court. Counsel submits that trial will take considerable time in its [2026:RJ-JP:2677] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-12256/2025] conclusion and the petitioner is in custody since his date of arrest, and thus, further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 4. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor assisted by the learned counsel for the complainant vehemently opposes the prayer for bail. They submits that there is serious allegation against the petitioner that he along with co-accused, in a criminal conspiracy, came armed with sharp edged weapon and attacked upon deceased Banshilal and injured Vishnu. They urges that looking to the nature and gravity of the offence as well as the evidence that has come on record so far, the petitioner does not deserve the indulgence of bail. Counsel further argue that one criminal case has also been registered against the petitioner. They, thus, crave dismissal of this bail application. 5. I have considered the contentions. 6. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, especially considering the fact that there is specific and serious allegation against the petitioner of causing injury by sharp edged upon on the person of the deceased as well as looking to the nature and gravity of offence, but without expressing any opinion on merits/demerits of this case, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. 7. Accordingly, this bail application stands dismissed. 8. 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 Manoj Solanki /39