[2026:RJ-JP:20166] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Misc. 3rd Bail Application No. 5772/2026 Satyendra S/o Shri Jadveer, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Gangarsauli, Police Station Kumher District Deeg, Rajasthan. (At Present Confined In Central Jail, Bharatpur) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rakesh Choudhary For Respondent(s) : Mr. Amit Kumar Gupta, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA Order 13/05/2026 1. This third bail application has been filed by the accused- petitioner in connection with FIR No.397/2023 registered at Police Station Kumher, Bharatpur for offence punishable under Sections 143, 302, 120-B of IPC. 2. Learned counsel for the accused-petitioner submits that accused-petitioner is in custody since 10.07.2023 and out of total 32 witnesses, only 20 prosecution witnesses have been examined before the trial Court. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the prosecution witnesses are not turning up of their evidence before the trial court and there is no effective progress in the trial because of default on the part of the prosecution. The accused-petitioner deserves to be released on bail, as accused- petitioner cannot be continued in custody for an indefinite period because for no fault on his part. He also pleaded the right to [2026:RJ-JP:20166] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-5772/2026] speedy trial is provided under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application and submits that material prosecution witnesses have been examined. He further states that the remaining prosecution witnesses who are the Government Officials including the Police Personnel would appear before the trial court for their examination as and when summoned. 4. Taking into consideration the overall facts and circumstances of the case and so also the allegations against the accused- petitioner and more particularly the fact that out of total 32 material witnesses, 20 have already been examined before the trial Court, this Court, at this stage, is not inclined to enlarge the accused-petitioner on bail. 5. Accordingly, this third bail application is dismissed. However, the trial Court is expected to conclude the trial as early as possible. 6. Since the remaining prosecution witnesses are almost the Government servant, the Superintendent of Police, Bharatpur is directed to ensure the prosecution witnesses who are the Police Personnel, to remain present before the trial Court as and when summoned. 7. In case the Police Personnel, who are prosecution witnesses do not appear before the trial Court on the day for which they are summoned without any cogent ground, their non-appearance shall be dealt with strictly. 8. Registry is directed to send the copy of this order to the [2026:RJ-JP:20166] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-5772/2026] Superintendent of Police, Bharatpur. 9. However, It is made clear that in case the prosecution witnesses, even after this order, do not appear before the trial Court for examination the petitioner would be at liberty to file the fresh bail application. (GANESH RAM MEENA),J PRATEEK/6