Rajasthan High Court – Jaipur
Kailashi Devi W/O Lalchand vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jp:22164) on 27 May, 2025
Author: Anil Kumar Upman
Bench: Anil Kumar Upman
[2025:RJ-JP:22164]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Second Bail Application No.
6401/2025
1. Bhairu Lal S/o Hariprasad, Aged About 35 Years, R/o
Negadiya, Tehsil Devli, Distt. Tonk
2. Babulal S/o Hariprasad, Aged About 35 Years, R/o
Negadiya, Tehsil Devli, Distt. Tonk (At Present Accused-
Petitioners Are Confined In Distt. Jail Tonk)
----Petitioners
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through PP
----Respondent
Connected With
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Second Bail Application No.
4278/2025
Mahendra S/o Shankar, Aged About 49 Years, R/o Thagra Colony,
Deoli, Village, Presently Negdiya, P.s. Deoli, District Tonk. (At
Present Accused Is Confined In Judicial Custody At District Jail,
Tonk)
—-Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through PP
—-Respondent
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Third Bail Application No. 6402/2025
Hariprasad @ Hari Lal S/o Kesara, Aged About 61 Years, R/o
Negadiya, Tehsil Devli, Distt. Tonk (At Present Accused-
Petitioners Are Confined In Distt. Jail Tonk)
—-Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through PP
—-Respondent
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Second Bail Application No.
6750/2025
Dharamraj S/o Babulal, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Ambapura
Colony, Dolta Mode, Devli At Present Resident Of Nagediya,
Police Devli, District Tonk (Raj.) (At Present Confined In District
Jail, Tonk (Raj.)
—-Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through PP
—-Respondent
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Second Bail Application No.
6751/2025
Kailashi Devi W/o Lalchand, Aged About 62 Years, R/o Nagediya,
(Downloaded on 21/06/2025 at 01:01:26 AM)
[2025:RJ-JP:22164] (2 of 4) [CRLMB-6401/2025]
Thana Devli, District Tonk. (Presently Confined In District Jail
Tonk, District Tonk).
—-Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through PP
—-Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vijendra Yadav
Mr. Farooq Ahmed
Mr. Rama Kant Sharma
Mr. Shiv Pratap Singh Rajawat
For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP
For Complainant(s) : Mr. Narayan Singh Chaudhary with
Ms. Sarika Choudhary
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN
Order
27/05/2025
1. These bail applications have been filed under Section 483 of
BNSS on behalf of the petitioners, who have been arrested in
connection with FIR No. 218/2024 registered at Police Station
Devli, District Tonk (Rajasthan) for the offences punishable under
Sections 143, 341 & 323 of IPC. After completion of investigation,
police filed charge-sheet in this matter for the offences punishable
under Sections 341, 323, 302, 147, 148 & 149 of IPC.
2. The previous bail applications filed on behalf of the
petitioners were dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to renew the
prayer for bail after recording testimony of eye-witnesses as well
as medical expert who conducted the post-mortem of the
deceased. Now, all the aforementioned witnesses have been
examined during the course of trial thus, present bail applications
have been preferred.
(Downloaded on 21/06/2025 at 01:01:26 AM)
[2025:RJ-JP:22164] (3 of 4) [CRLMB-6401/2025]
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that petitioners
have falsely been implicated in this case. It is contended that all
eight eye-witnesses have been examined during the course of trial
wherein they have not supported the prosecution case and have
been declared hostile. Counsel submit that at present, there are
no criminal antecedents against the petitioners and trial will take
considerable time in its conclusion. Petitioners are in custody since
their date of arrest and further custody of the petitioners would
not serve any fruitful purpose.
4. Learned Public Prosecutor assisted by learned counsel for the
complainant vehemently opposes the submissions made by
counsel for the petitioners. Counsel for the complainant submits
that it is apparent from the testimony of the medical expert that
deceased expired on account of injuries caused by the accused
persons. However, they failed to controvert the fact that all eight
eye-witnesses have not supported the prosecution case and they
have been declared hostile.
5. I have considered the contentions.
6. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances
of the case; considering the arguments advanced by learned
counsel for the parties, especially considering the fact that all
eight eye-witnesses have not supported the prosecution case and
they have been declared hostile, so also considering the fact that
at present, there are no criminal antecedents against the
petitioners and there is bleak chance of culmination of trial in near
future as well as looking to the custody period, but without
(Downloaded on 21/06/2025 at 01:01:26 AM)
[2025:RJ-JP:22164] (4 of 4) [CRLMB-6401/2025]
commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem
it fit and proper to allow these bail applications.
7. Accordingly, these second and third bail applications are
allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioners -(1) Bhairu Lal
S/o Hariprasad, (2) Babulal S/o Hariprasad, (3) Mahendra
S/o Shankar, (4) Hariprasad @ Hari Lal S/o Kesara, (5)
Dharamraj S/o Babulal and (6) Kailashi Devi W/o Lalchand
shall be released on bail provided each of them furnishes a
personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand
only) together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000/-
(Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) each to the satisfaction of
the learned Trial Court with the stipulation that they 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.
8. The observation made hereinabove is only for decision of the
instant bail applications and would not have any impact on the
trial of the case in any manner.
(ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J
LALIT MOHAN /32-36
(Downloaded on 21/06/2025 at 01:01:26 AM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)