[2026:RJ-JP:304] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 14511/2025 Sanjesh Son Of Ratan Lal, Aged About 27 Years, Resident Of Peeladanda, Police Station Baharawanda Kalan, District Sawai Madhopur (Raj.) (At Present In District Jail Sawai Madhopur) ----Petitioner Versus The State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Shyam Bihari Gautam For Respondent(s) For Complainant(s) : : Mr. Amit Punia, PP Mr. Vishnu Bohra HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 07/01/2026 1. This bail application under Section 483 of BNSS has been filed on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.89/2024 registered at Police Station Bahrawanda Kalan, District Sawai Madhopur for offences punishable under Sections 189(2) and 103(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, (in short ‘BNS’) 2023. After completion of investigation, police filed charge-sheet in this matter for offences punishable under Sections 103(1) and 61(2)(a) of BNS, 2023. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. He submits that the petitioner has been made accused in this case with the aid of Section 61(2)(a) of BNS, 2023 (corresponding to Section 120B of IPC). It is submitted that co-accused persons namely- Banwari Lal @ Sarpanch and Mahesh Chand have already been granted benefit [2026:RJ-JP:304] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-14511/2025] of bail by this Court after considering the testimony of eye-witness namely- Panchi Devi. It is submitted that there are no criminal antecedents against the petitioner and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion as till date, only 8 witnesses have been examined out of 33 cited prosecution witnesses. Counsel submits that petitioner is in custody since 15.10.2024 and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor assisted by learned counsel for the complainant vehemently opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner. They submit that main accused of this case is co-accused namely- Hanuman with whom petitioner and other co-accused persons conspired and in furtherance of that conspiracy, two persons were murdered. 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 petitioner, especially considering the material available on record in the form of charge-sheet, as also the fact that petitioner has been made accused in this case with the aid of Section 61(2)(a) of BNS, 2023 (corresponding to Section 120B of IPC), so also the fact that similarly situated co-accused persons have already been granted benefit of bail by this Court 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. [2026:RJ-JP:304] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-14511/2025] 6. This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner – Sanjesh Son Of Ratan Lal shall be released on bail provided, he 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 he 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 GAUTAM JAIN /25