[2025:RJ-JP:18582] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 2nd Bail Application No. 5200/2025 Shayam Singh S/o Kanhiram, Aged About 35 Years, Resident Of Chanderpura Police Station Mishroli District Jhalawar (At Present Confined In District Jail, Jhalawar (Raj.) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent Connected With S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 2nd Bail Application No. 5201/2025 Manohar Singh S/o Bhagwan Singh, Aged About 35 Years, Resident Of Chanderpura Police Station Mishroli District Jhalawar (At Present Confined In District Jail, Jhalawar (Raj.) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rohit Khandelwal For Respondent(s) : Mr. Jai Prakash Tiwari, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 02/05/2025 1. These second bail applications have been filed under Section 483 of BNSS on behalf of the petitioners, who have been arrested in connection with FIR No.27/2025 registered at Police Station Pidawa, District Jhalawar for the offences punishable under Sections 178, 179 & 180 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, (in short ‘BNS’) 2023. [2025:RJ-JP:18582] (2 of 4) [CRLMB-5200/2025] 2. First bail applications of the petitioners were dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 04.03.2025 with liberty to renew the prayer of bail after submission of result of investigation. Now, charge-sheet has been filed thus, these second bail applications have been preferred. 3. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that the accused-petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. Learned counsel submits that offences under Sections 178, 179 & 180 of BNS, 2023 are not made out in the present case and present case would fall under Section 182(1) of BNS, 2023 which is bailable. According to the prosecution case, petitioners were found in possession of 200 notes of Rs.500/- (Five Hundred Rupees) each. It is submitted that alleged recovered currency notes were totally different from the original currency notes as image of Mahatma Gandhi was not present on the notes which shows that the said notes were only for the purpose of playing games. There are no criminal antecedents of similar nature against the petitioners and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. It is contended that petitioner- Shayam Singh is in custody since 30.01.2025 and petitioner- Manohar Singh is in custody since 10.02.2025. Further custody of the petitioners would not serve any fruitful purpose. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners. 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 learned [2025:RJ-JP:18582] (3 of 4) [CRLMB-5200/2025] counsel for the petitioners, so also considering the material made available on record in the form of charge-sheet and trial will take considerable 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 these second bail applications. 7. These second bail applications are accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner – 1) Shayam Singh S/o Kanhiram and 2) Manohar Singh S/o Bhagwan Singh, shall be released on bail provided each of them 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 they 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-petitioners shall not involve in any other offence(s) during currency of the bail and they shall mark their presence once in three months in the concerned police station, till trial is concluded. 9. Concerned SHO is directed to maintain a register recording the attendance of the petitioners, as directed above. In case the petitioners fail to mark their 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 [2025:RJ-JP:18582] (4 of 4) [CRLMB-5200/2025] 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 them by this Court. 11. The observation made herein above is only for decision of the instant bail applications and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J GAUTAM JAIN /39-40