[2025:RJ-JP:23184] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 5723/2025 Dinesh Saini S/o Shri Chhajuram Saini, R/o Surajpole Gate Bahar, Saini Mohalla, Presently In Front of Laxman Vatika Marriage Home, Circular Road, Bharatpur The Then Patwari, Office Of The Land Record Section Collectorate, Bharatpur (Raj.) (The Accused Petitioner Presently Confined In Jail At Bharatpur). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajneesh Gupta assisted by Mr. Utkarsh Goyal and Ms. Chanchal For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vijay Singh Yadav, Public Prosecutor HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA (V.J.) Order 13/06/2025 1. This bail application has been filed by the petitioner under Section 483 of the B.N.S.S. arising out of F.I.R. No.51/2025, registered with the Police Station C.P.S. Jaipur, ACB for offences under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption (Amended) Act, 2018. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 05.03.2025. Counsel further submits that the Police after completion of investigation has submitted charge- sheet against the petitioner for offence under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption (Amended) Act, 2018. Counsel further submits that the petitioner is a Government/Public servant and therefore, prosecution sanction by the competent authority is [2025:RJ-JP:23184] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-5723/2025] required to prosecute the petitioner. Counsel further submits that the provisions of Section 19 of the P.C. Act clearly speaks that no Court shall take cognizance for offence against the public servant until and unless prosecution sanction is accorded by the competent authority. In the present case, no prosecution sanction has been accorded so far and in such circumstances, the court cannot proceed for want of prosecution sanction keeping the petitioner in custody would be unjustified, therefore, he may be released on bail. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the State strongly opposed the bail application and submits that the petitioner has been caught red handed taking bribe. 4. Considered the submissions made at bar and also perused the challan papers. 5. Learned Public Prosecutor submits that no prosecution sanction has been accorded so far so as to prosecute the petitioner in the alleged offence. 6. Having regard to the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner so also the fact that the petitioner is in custody since 05.03.2025 and more particularly the fact that prosecution sanction so as to prosecute the petitioner has not been accorded so far by the competent authority, this Court without expressing any opinion on merits and demerits of the case, deems just and proper to enlarge the petitioner on bail. 7. Accordingly, this bail application is allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner shall be released on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees [2025:RJ-JP:23184] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-5723/2025] One Lac only) together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) each to the satisfaction of the trial Court with the stipulation that he shall appear before the trial Court or any other Court to which the matter is transferred, on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so. (GANESH RAM MEENA), (V.J.),J GAURAV SRIVASTAVA /Satyendra/112