[2026:RJ-JP:25884] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 2223/2026 URN: CRLMB / 3930U / 2026 Sangeeta W/o Kailash, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Ward No. 10, Near Chhota Bus Stand, Nawalgarh, Police Station Nawalgarh, District Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan. (At Present Confined In District Jail, Jhunjhunu). ----Petitioner Versus The State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. OP Jhajhria Mr. Satvir Singh Rawat Ms. Priyanka For Respondent(s) : Mr. Jaiprakash Tiwari, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAMIL KUMAR MATHUR Order 09/07/2026 1. The petitioner has preferred this bail application under Section 483 of BNSS in FIR No.241/2025 registered at Police Station Nawalgarh, District Jhunjhunu for offences under Sections 189(2), 115(2), 126(2), 140(3) of BNS, 2023 AND Section 3(2) (va) of SC/ST Act, 2015. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Public Prosecutor and perused the material available on record. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. He submits that the petitioner was earlier married to the deceased-Kailash and after their separation, she started residing with the co-accused Sandeep. He further submits that though there is an allegation against the petitioner for causing the death of the deceased but none of the prosecution witnesses has stated that she was present [2026:RJ-JP:25884] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-2223/2026] at the place of occurrence. It is contended that the petitioner has been implicated solely on the allegation of conspiracy on the premise that she is the wife of the co-accused Sandeep. He further argues that no overt act has been attributed to the petitioner which directly contributed to the death of the deceased- Kailash. It is also submitted that the petitioner is a woman has no criminal antecedents and has been in judicial custody since 25.10.2025. The trial of the case will take considerable time, therefore, no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner in further custody, consequently, the bail application deserves to be allowed. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application. 5. On consideration of the rival submissions and material available on record and in light of submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner but without expressing any opinion on merits/demerits of the case, I am inclined to grant benefit of bail to the petitioner. 6. Consequently, the bail application under Section 483 B.N.S.S. is allowed and it is directed that the petitioner Sangeeta W/o Kailash, be released on bail provided she furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court with the stipulation that she shall appear before that Court on all subsequent dates of hearing tilU+007al conclusion of the trial. (PRAMIL KUMAR MATHUR),J Chandan/75