[2025:RJ-JP:30517] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 7966/2025 Anees Khan @ Anees Khanam D/o Mohammed Ali W/o Farukh, R/o Quarter No.4 Nagar Nigam Colony Chhawani Police Thana Gumanpura Kota Rajasthan. (At Present Confined At Central Jail Kota) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Abdul Kalam Khan For Respondent(s) For Complainant(s) : : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP Mr. Wasim Akram HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 07/08/2025 1. The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.115/2025 registered at Police Station Vigyan Nagar, District Kota City for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468, 471, 464 and 120B of IPC. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. It is submitted that petitioner is not named in the FIR and alleged offences are triable by Magistrate. Counsel submits that one other case has also been registered against the petitioner for similar offences wherein she was taken in custody on 15.02.2025. Thereafter, vide order dated 26.05.2025, she was granted benefit of bail by the co- ordinate bench of this court. It is contended that trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. Counsel contends that petitioner is a female and she is in custody since 27.05.2025 and [2025:RJ-JP:30517] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-7966/2025] further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor assisted by learned counsel for the complainant vehemently opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner. It is submitted that petitioner is an employee of Nagar Nigam, Kota. Learned counsel for the complainant submits that petitioner is a habitual offender as one other case for almost similar offences has also been registered against her. 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 petitioner, especially considering the fact that petitioner is a female and alleged offences are triable by Magistrate, as also considering the fact that in other case which was registered for almost similar offences she has been granted benefit of bail by co-ordinate bench of this court 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 the bail application. 6. This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner – Anees Khan @ Anees Khanam D/o Mohammed Ali W/o Farukh shall be released on bail provided, she 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 [2025:RJ-JP:30517] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-7966/2025] satisfaction of the learned trial Court with the stipulation that she 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. However, it is made clear that the petitioner shall not involve in similar offence(s) during currency of bail granted by this Court. The petitioner is further directed to mark her presence in the concerned police station in first week of every month, till trial is concluded. 8. Concerned SHO is directed to maintain a register recording the attendance of the petitioner, as directed above. In case the petitioner fails to mark her 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 breach of any 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 the petitioner by this Court. 10. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the concerned SHO for necessary compliance. 11. The observations made hereinabove are only for 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 GAUTAM JAIN /162