[2025:RJ-JP:16733] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous II Bail Application No. 4587/2025 Ramdeen S/o Omaram, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Village Beenawas, Tehsil Bilada, Police Station Kaparda, At Present Divya Marble Banad Road, Bhomiya Ji Ka Thaan, Police Station Banad, District Jodhpur. (At Present In Central Jail, Kota) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajendra Yadav For Respondent(s) : Mr. S.R. Dhakar, PP, Mr. Manvendra Singh, PP, Mr. Amit Kumar Gupta, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR Order 21/04/2025 1. The instant second bail application has been filed under Section 483 BNSS on behalf of accused-petitioner. The petitioner has been arrested in connection with FIR No.01/2025 registered at Police Station Cyber Police, District Kota City for the offence(s) under Sections 318(4), 61(2)(b) and 111(2)(b) of BNS and 66D of IT Act. 2. Learned counsel for the accused-petitioner submits that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. It is contended that the first bail application of the accused-petitioner was dismissed with liberty to file afresh after filing of the charge- sheet. The charge-sheet has already been produced against the petitioner. It is also contended that in the charge-sheet, there is no allegation that the petitioner has directly received any money [2025:RJ-JP:16733] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-4587/2025] in his bank account from the persons residing in foreign countries. The main allegation is against the other co-accused Akshay Kumar and the entire amount was deposited in the bank account of Akshay Kumar and other account holders. No amount was transferred in any bank account of the petitioner. The police has also not taken on record any bank account statement of the petitioner showing his involvement in the alleged crime, therefore, the second bail application of the accused-petitioner may be allowed. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the grant of second bail application and submitted the detailed factual report containing the specific query put forth by the Court vide order dated 03.04.2025 and 09.04.2025. It is contended that the petitioner in connivance with the other co-accused Akshay Kumar received huge amount in his bank account and also in the accounts maintained by other persons. It is also contended that in his statement rendered under Section 180 of BNSS, Shantilal Vaishnav specifically stated that the petitioner Ramdeen was using his account number and through his account he deposited Rs. 18,500/- in the account of Shantilal. It is further contended that the petitioner was receiving the amount in his bank account and in other bank accounts maintained by him. The WhatsApp chats taken on record further shows that the petitioner was involved in siphoning off the amount after recieving it from the complainant. It is further contended that 44 complaints were registered against bank account numbers which were found in the mobile used by the petitioner, therefore, considering the gravity of the offences, [2025:RJ-JP:16733] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-4587/2025] the second bail application of the accused-petitioner deserves dismissal. 4. Heard and perused the material available on record. 5. Considering the factual report submitted by learned Public Prosecutor, which shows presence of enough material disclosing the fact that the petitioner has used and operated the accounts of other persons through his mobile phone in order to recieve the amount after cheating several persons, therefore, considering the above facts, this Court is not inclined to enlarged the accused- petitioner on bail. 6. Hence, the criminal misc. second bail application of the accused-petitioner is hereby, dismissed. (PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J Keshav/8