[2025:RJ-JP:23672] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 3644/2025 Devkinandan S/o Girraj Prasad, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Gadhmora, Police Station Gadhmora, District Gangapurcity. ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vinod Kumar Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shree Ram Dhakar, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL (V. J.) Order 27/06/2025 1. Instant anticipatory bail application has been filed by petitioner apprehending his arrest in connection with FIR No.114/2024 registered at Police Station Kolwa District Dausa for the offence under Section 380 of IPC. 2. Counsel for petitioner vehemently argued that petitioner is a gold smith and has been falsely implicated merely on the basis of statements of co-accused who stolen the gold jewellery. 3. However, perusal of the impugned order dated 22.01.2025 goes to show that petitioner had been pooked in as many as six criminal cases. Counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has not been arrested in any of the cases. 4. Be that as it may, considering the involvement of petitioner in six criminal cases, having identical in nature, this Court is not [2025:RJ-JP:23672] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-3644/2025] inclined to deem it fit and proper to grant benefit of anticipatory bail to petitioner. 5. It is trite law that anticipatory bail can be granted in exceptional circumstances where the court is prima facie of the view that the applicant has falsely been involved in the crime and would not misuse his/ her liberty. Such proposition of law has been expounded by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in cases of Jai Prakash Singh Vs. State of Bihar [(2012) 4 SCC 379] & State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma [AIR 2014 SC 626]. 6. This Court finds it difficult to discern, at this stage, that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present matter nor the case of present petitioner falls under any of the exceptional circumstances, as laid down by the Apex Court in afore-referred cases, more particularly when the matter is under investigation. In such totality of facts & circumstances, this Court is not inclined to grant the benefit of anticipatory bail to petitioner. 7. However, after arguing for some time and having instructions of petitioner, counsel for petitioner does not press this bail application and states that petitioner is ready to surrender before the concerned Court. 8. In view of above, the present bail application is hereby dismissed as not pressed. 9. In case petitioner surrenders himself before the concerned Court within a period of 20 days from today and moves a regular bail application which is to be filed before 12.00 PM of working [2025:RJ-JP:23672] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-3644/2025] day, the concerned Court may make an endeavor to decide the bail application expeditiously as early as possible, on the same day, if possible. 10. However, petitioner shall not be arrested till 20 days’ from today or upto date of surrender within such period. (SUDESH BANSAL (V. J.)),J SACHIN/MAHIMA/63