[2025:RJ-JP:33113] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 4464/2025 Papparam S/o Shri Budharam, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Village Govindpura Bavadi, Police Station Khedapa, District Jodhpur, Current Naik 2706277N, D Company 15 Grenadiers, Rajori, Jammu Kashmir (Accused In Custody At Central Jail, Jaipur). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vijay Singh Poonia For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP Mr. Tapesh Agarwal, PP Mr. Vinod Meena, Inspector, Special Police Station, CID Jaipur HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 30/07/2025 1. The instant bail application under Section 483 of BNSS has been filed on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.03/2024 registered at Special Police Station, CID Security, Jaipur for offence under Section 3/9 of Official Secrets Act. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that accused- petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. He submits that the petitioner has been taken on 07.12.2024 but without taking prosecution sanction, charge sheet has been filed against the petitioner. He submits that in absence of prosecution sanction, [2025:RJ-JP:33113] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-4464/2025] trial cannot be commenced. The alleged offence is triable by magistrate and in any case, he cannot be sentenced to more than seven years despite the fact that maximum punishment for the alleged offence is fourteen years. The petitioner is in custody since 07.12.2024 and trial of the case will take considerable time in its conclusion. Further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose as no recovery or investigation is to be made from him. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposes the bail application. He submits that there are serious allegations against the petitioner that he shared confidential secrets and sensitive information to the neighbour-country Pakistan. He further submits prosecution sanction has already been issued and same has been presented before the learned trial court. He further submits that evidence has been collected by the investigating agency that WhatsApp has been activated on a mobile in Pakistan on the mobile numbers of the petitioner. He argues that installation of WhatsApp on another mobile in Pakistan on the mobile numbers of the petitioner is possible only when he shares one time password. It is thus, prayed that looking to the nature of allegations, bail should not be granted. 4. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the arguments advanced by both the sides and looking to the nature of allegations attributed to the petitioner who is working in Indian Army and gravity of offence, I [2025:RJ-JP:33113] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-4464/2025] am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, this bail application is dismissed. 5. The observation made hereinabove is only for disposal of the instant bail application and would not prejudice trial in any manner. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J GAUTAM JAIN /407