[2025:RJ-JP:10477] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 3333/2025 Ishwar Singh S/o Nayansukh, Aged About 59 Years, R/o Roliyawas, Police Station Rampura, District Rewadi (Hariyana) (At Present In Sub Jail Kishangarh Bas, Alwar). ----Accused-Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Siyaram Sharma, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Ms. Arti Sharma, PP and Mr. Samarth Sharma, Adv., for complainant. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 07/03/2025 1. The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.124/2016 registered at Police Station Kotkasim, District Alwar for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 406 and 120B of IPC. Investigating is being conducted in this matter for the offences punishable under Sections 420 and 406 of IPC. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. It is submitted that from bare perusal of the FIR, no case is made out against the petitioner under Sections 420 and 406 of IPC. He further submits that it is a simple case of money borrowing as petitioner borrowed some amount from the complainant. He [2025:RJ-JP:10477] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-3333/2025] argues that now complainant wants to recover the said amount in the garb of criminal investigation. He further argues that trial of the case will take considerable time in its conclusion. He contends that the petitioner is in custody since 22.02.2025 and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor assisted by learned counsel for the complainant vehemently opposes the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. Learned counsel for the complainant submits that initially amount was taken by the petitioner with a promise to return the same within ten days. It is submitted that when same was not paid or returned then, petitioner executed an agreement to sell of his land in favour of the complainant but said land is not in the name of 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 parties, as also looking to the nature of dispute and trial will take time in its conclusion as well as looking to the period of custody, 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 - Ishwar Singh S/o Nayansukh shall be released on bail provided he 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 [2025:RJ-JP:10477] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-3333/2025] stipulation that he 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. 7. It is made clear that the accused-petitioner shall not involve in any other offence(s) during currency of the bail and he shall mark his presence in first week of every month in the concerned police station, till trial is concluded. 8. Concerned SHO is directed to maintain a register recording the attendance of the petitioner, as directed above. In case the petitioner fails to mark his presence in the concerned police station, as directed above, the concerned SHO is directed to immediately report the matter to the concerned Court in this regard. 9. If breach of any of these conditions is reported or come to the notice of the Court, the same shall alone be a reason for the trial Court to cancel the bail granted to him by this Court. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J MADAN/207