[2025:RJ-JP:28236] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 5958/2025 Fida Hussain S/o Late Ayub, Aged About 23 Years, R/o Rasulpur, Police Station Kaithwada, District Deeg, Rajasthan. (At Present Petitioner Confined In Sub Jail Deeg). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent Connected With S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 6101/2025 1. Wajid S/o Aarif, R/o Village Pathrali, Police Station Gopalgarh, District Deeg. (The Accused Petitioner Is At Present Confined In Sub Jail Deeg) 2. Irfan S/o Alimohammed, R/o Govindpur, Police Station Sikari, District Deeg. (The Accused Petitioner Is At Present Confined In Sub Jail Deeg) 3. Ajruddeen S/o Jaikam, R/o Nagla Aaramsingh (Shadi Baas) Police Station Kaithwara, District Deeg. (The Accused Petitioner Is At Present Confined In Sub Jail Deeg) ----Petitioners Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Its PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Balram Vashisth Mr. Sanjay Khan For Respondent(s) : Mr. Tapesh Agarwal, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 28/07/2025 1. These bail applications have been filed under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) on behalf of the petitioners, who have been arrested in connection with FIR No.129/2025 registered at Police Station Sikari, District Deeg for the offences punishable under Sections 319(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 317(2), 317(4), 317(5), 303(2), 111(2)(a), 313 & 61(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, (in short ‘BNS’), 2023 and Section 66D of I.T. (Amended) Act, 2008. After completion of investigation, police filed charge-sheet in this matter. [2025:RJ-JP:28236] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-5958/2025] 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that the accused-petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. It is submitted that offence punishable under Section 111(2)(a) of the BNS, 2023 is not made out. It is submitted that there are no criminal antecedents against the petitioners and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. Counsel submit that petitioners are in custody since 14.04.2025 and further custody of the petitioners would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioners. He submits that petitioners are involved in cyber fraud and they induced several persons to deposit amount in their bank accounts. Counsel submits that petitioners have received about Rs. 75,000/- in their bank accounts. 4. I have considered the contentions. 5. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; especially considering the argument advanced by learned counsel for both the parties, material available on record in the form of charge-sheet; absence of criminal antecedents and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion as well as looking to the custody period, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it proper to allow these bail applications. 6. These bail applications are accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioners (1) Fida Hussain S/o Late Ayub, (2) Wajid S/o Aarif, (3) Irfan S/o Alimohammed, and (4) Ajruddeen S/o Jaikam, shall be released on bail provided [2025:RJ-JP:28236] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-5958/2025] 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. 7. 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 in first week of every month in the concerned police station, till trial is concluded. 8. 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 regard. 9. 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. 10. The observations made hereinabove is only for the decision of the instant bail application and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J CHARU SONI /118-119