[2025:RJ-JP:22170] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Third Bail Application No. 6803/2025 Hastimal Meena S/o Jaganlal Meena, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Village Post Bilota, Police Station Aligarh, Tehsil Uniyara, District Tonk. At Present Posted As Mts Karamchari Aayur-Yoga Preventive Cardiology Vibhag, Rashtriya Ayurveda Sansthan, Jorawar Singh Gate, Amer Road, Jaipur (Raj.) (At Present Confined In Central Jail Jaipur). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent Connected With S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Third Bail Application No. 6905/2025 Roshan Kumar S/o Shyam Babu Prasad, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Village Baleitha, Post Nadol, Police Station Masodhi, District Patna State Bihar, At Presently R/o Mts Karmchari Library Department, National Institute Of Ayurveda, Jorawar Singh Gate, Amer Road, Jaipur (Raj.) (At Present Confined In Centre Jail Jaipur). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Raj, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Gajveer Singh Rajawat Mr. Vinod Kumar Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 27/05/2025 1. These third bail applications have been filed under Section 483 of BNSS on behalf of the petitioners, who have been arrested in connection with FIR No.60/2024 registered at Police Station [2025:RJ-JP:22170] (2 of 4) [CRLMB-6803/2025] Special Police Station(SOG), District ATS & SOG (Raj.) for the offences punishable under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 & 120B of IPC and Section 3/4 of Rajasthan Public Examination (Prevention of Use of Unfair Means), Act 1992. After completion of investigation, police filed charge-sheet in this matter for the offences punishable under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 & 120B of IPC and Sections 3, 4 & 6 of Rajasthan Public Examination (Prevention of Use of Unfair Means), Act 1992. 2. The first bail applications filed on behalf of the petitioners were dismissed by this court vide order dated 13.01.2025. Thereafter, second bail applications filed on behalf of the petitioners were dismissed as withdrawn by this court vide order dated 06.05.2025 while giving liberty to the petitioners to file fresh bail applications before the learned trial Court under the provisions of Section 480(6) of BNSS (corresponding to Section 437(6) of Cr.PC). It is contended that bail application preferred by the petitioners before the learned Magistrate was dismissed vide order dated 14.05.2025. Thereafter, they preferred bail applications under Sections 483 of BNSS before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, No.1, Jaipur Metropolitan-II however, said bail applications were also dismissed vide orders dated 16.05.2025 and 19.05.2025 thus, this third bail applications have been preferred on behalf of the petitioners. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel submit that petitioners are facing Magistrate trial and it is obligatory for the learned trial Court to conclude the trial within a period of 60 days [2025:RJ-JP:22170] (3 of 4) [CRLMB-6803/2025] from the first date fixed for recording prosecution evidence. Counsel submit that said provisions are mandatory in nature and bail can only be refused on the basis of reasonable grounds. Counsel submit that no such grounds are available on record in this case. Counsel submit that delay cannot be attributed to the petitioners as it is evident from the order-sheet that proceedings were deferred on number of occasions and for different reasons. Counsel submit that there are no criminal antecedents against the petitioners and there is bleak chance of culmination of trial in near future. Petitioners are in custody since September, 2024 and further custody of the petitioners would not serve any fruitful purpose. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by 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 counsel for the parties, especially considering the fact that alleged offences are triable by magistrate, material made available on record in the form of charge-sheet, as also considering the fact that petitioners are in custody since September, 2024 and there is bleak chance of culmination of trial in near future, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it fit and proper to allow these third bail applications. 7. These third bail applications are accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioners- (1) Hastimal Meena S/o Jaganlal Meena and (2) Roshan Kumar S/o Shyam Babu [2025:RJ-JP:22170] (4 of 4) [CRLMB-6803/2025] Prasad 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. The observation made hereinabove is only for decision of these bail applications and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J LALIT MOHAN /38-39