[2026:RJ-JP:8266] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 2nd Bail Application No. 2994/2026 Akash S/o Mukesh, Aged About 22 Years, R/o Ranwal, Kundera, Sawai Madhopur, Rajasthan, Police Station Kundera, District Sawai Madhopur. (Presently Accused Petitioner Is Confined At District Jail Sawai Madhopur). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Shubhang Sharma Mr. Pulkit Raj For Respondent(s) : Mr. Devi Singh, PP Mr. Tarun jain HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR Order 23/02/2026 1. The instant second bail application has been filed under Section 483 BNSS on behalf of accused-petitioner. The accused- petitioner has been arrested in connection with FIR No. 39/2025 registered at Police Station Kundera, District Sawaimadhopur for the offences under Sections 189(2), 115(2), 126(2), 118(1) and 109(1) of BNS. 2. Learned counsel for the accused-petitioner submits that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. It is contended that first bail application of the accused-petitioner was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file afresh after recording statement of injured and eye-witnesses. It is contended that eye- witness PW-5 Premraj has turned hostile and not supported the [2026:RJ-JP:8266] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-2994/2026] prosecution story. The statement of PW-12 Sonu (injured) is not reliable. The accused-petitioner is in custody since long and trial of the case will take considerable time, therefore the second bail application of the accused-petitioner may be allowed. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the complainant opposed the bail application and contended that first bail application of the accused-petitioner was dismissed as withdrawn with the liberty to file afresh after recording of the statement of injured witness Sonu, who in his deposition specifically attributed his injuries to the present petitioner and other co-accused. It is also contended that at the instance of petitioner gandasa was recovered. It is also contended that victim's leg and hand got amputated due to injury caused, therefore considering the aforesaid facts, the second bail application filed by accused-petitioner deserves to be dismissed. 4. Heard and perused the material available on the record. 5. It is not desirable to express anything on probative value of statement of injured witness Sonu. Considering the nature of injury sustained to injured, this court is not inclined to enlarge the accused-petitioner on bail. 6. Accordingly, the second bail application filed by accused- petitioner is hereby dismissed. (PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J ashu /11