[2025:RJ-JP:31150] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 4801/2025 Pandey Rohit S/o Yashwant Pandey, Aged About 27 Years, R/o House No. 30, Basant Vihar, Gadkhol Amboli, Distt. Baruch Gujarat Presently At Ward No. 27 Purani Basti Shahdol (M.P.) (At Present Confined In Central Jail Jhalawar). ----Accused-Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent Connected With S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 6547/2025 Smt. Sheetal Devi W/o Munil, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Ward No. 27, Purani Basti, Shahdol, District Shahdol, Police Station Kotwali Shahdol (MP) (At Present Central Jail, Kota). ----Accused-Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Amit Dadhich, Adv., and Mr. Brijendra Singh Kachhawa, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP with Mr. Tapesh Agarwal, PP and Mr. Samarth Sharma, Adv., for complainant. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 11/08/2025 1. These bail applications have been filed under Section 483 of BNSS on behalf of the petitioners, who have been arrested in connection with FIR No.05/2025 registered at Police Station Jawahar Nagar, District Kota City for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 308(2) & 61(2)(a) of BNS, 2023. After [2025:RJ-JP:31150] (2 of 4) [CRLMB-4801/2025] completion of investigation, police filed charge-sheet in this matter. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that the accused-petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. Learned counsel submit that alleged offences are triable by Magistrate, for which maximum punishment is seven years. They further submit that it appears from the FIR that amount was given to the petitioners as loan. They argue that now in the garb of criminal proceedings, complainant wants to recover the amount from the petitioners. They further argue that charge-sheet has already been filed, there are no criminal antecedents against the petitioners and trial of the case will take considerable time in its conclusion. They contend that the petitioners are in custody since 24.01.2025 and 02.04.2025 respectively and further custody of the petitioners would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor assisted by learned counsel for the complainant vehemently opposes the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners. Learned counsel for the complainant submits that admittedly, huge amount has been transferred in the bank account of the petitioners by the complainant, which is evident from the charge-sheet. 4. I have considered the contentions. 5. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, especially the fact that alleged offences are triable by Magistrate, for which maximum punishment is seven years; charge-sheet has been filed; absence of criminal [2025:RJ-JP:31150] (3 of 4) [CRLMB-4801/2025] antecedents and trial will take 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 bail applications. 6. These bail applications are accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioners – 1. Pandey Rohit S/o Yashwant Pandey, and 2. Smt. Sheetal Devi W/o Munil 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. 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 once in every three months 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 [2025:RJ-JP:31150] (4 of 4) [CRLMB-4801/2025] 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. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the concerned SHO for necessary compliance. 11. The observation made herein above is only for decision of these instant bail applications and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J MADAN/86-87