[2025:RJ-JP:13336] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 2nd Bail Application No. 3502/2025 Dinesh Mishra S/o Late Shri Damodar Prasad Mishra, R/o House No. 92, Mishro Ka Mohalla, Nawa City,, Nagore, At Present Tenant Flat No. 911, Mefeyar Hites, Police Station Kardhani, Jothwara, Jaipur, Rajasthan. (At Present Confined In Central Jail, Jaipur.) ----Petitioner Versus The State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kuldeep Aswal with Mr. Kuldeep Mishra For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vivek Choudhary, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 25/03/2025 1. The second bail application under Section 483 of BNSS has been filed, on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.169/2024 registered at Police Station Vidhayak Puri, District Jaipur City (South) (Raj.) for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 406, 467 and 468 of IPC. Later on, police filed charge-sheet in this matter for the offences punishable under Sections 420 and 406 of IPC. 2. First bail application of the petitioner was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 13.12.2024 with liberty to file fresh bail application after recording testimony of the complainant. Now, complainant of this case has been examined during the course of trial thus, this second bail application has been preferred. [2025:RJ-JP:13336] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-3502/2025] 3. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. It is submitted that there is business relationship between the parties. According to the cross-examination of complainant, it has been clearly stated by him that petitioner wanted to give money with regard to the articles but he was not interested in taking money as he was only interested in articles. It is submitted that charge- sheet has been filed and till date only one witness has been examined out of six cited prosecution witnesses thus, possibility of further time in culmination of trial cannot be ruled out. Petitioner is in custody since 05.07.2024 and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that two other cases have been registered against the petitioner for similar offences. 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 both the parties, especially considering the nature of dispute between the parties, so also considering the cross-examination of the complainant and trial will take time in its conclusion as well as looking to the custody period, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it proper to allow the second bail application. 7. This second bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner - Dinesh Mishra S/o Late Shri [2025:RJ-JP:13336] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-3502/2025] Damodar Prasad Mishra, 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 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. 8. 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 second week of every month in the concerned police station, till trial is concluded. 9. 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. 10. If any breach 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. 11. The observation made herein above is only for decision of the instant bail application and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J GAUTAM JAIN /49