[2026:RJ-JP:2613] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 17078/2025 Arjun S/o Durgalal, Aged About 18 Years, R/o Bagdar, Police Sta- tion Jhalrapatan, District Jhalawar (Rajasthan) (At Present Con- fined In District Jail Jhalawar). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Prakash Chand Yadav Mr. Ayush Bamboliya For Respondent(s) : Mr. Amit Punia, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 21/01/2026 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.135/2023 registered at Police Station Jhalrapatan, District Jhalawar for offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC. After completion of investigation, police filed charge- sheet in this matter for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 394, 212, 34 & 120-B of IPC & Section 4/25 of Arms Act. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel submits that the entire prosecution case rests upon the last seen evidence of PW-14 Badal, PW-15 Jai Narayan, PW-16 Ram Singh & PW-17 Devraj Gurjar. All the witnesses have been declared hostile by the prosecution as they have not supported the prosecution case. Counsel contends that no test identification parade was [2026:RJ-JP:2613] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-17078/2025] conducted. It is submitted that other co-accused persons have already been granted benefit of bail by this Court as well as co- ordinate Bench of this Court. It is contended that trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. Counsel submits that petitioner is in custody since his date of arrest and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner. 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 fact that aforementioned witnesses have been declared hostile by the prosecution and other co-accused persons have already been granted bail by this Court as well as Co-ordinate Bench of this Court; 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. This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner – Arjun S/o Durgalal 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 [2026:RJ-JP:2613] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-17078/2025] 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 /35