[2025:RJ-JP:24650] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 2nd Bail Application No. 8305/2025 Nikita Bangar W/o Shri Sahil Baig D/o Rajendra Bangar, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Bangar Nyun Munim Colony, Vijay Nagar, Krishi Mandi Road, Barala-2, Vijay Nagar, Ajmer At R/o Flat No. 1001, 10Th Floor The Rise Apartment, Haldighati, P.s Pratap Nagar, Jaipur (At Present Confined In Central Jail Jaipur). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rakesh Kumar Saini For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 04/07/2025 1. This second bail application has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.236/2024 registered at Police Station Vidhyakpuri, District Jaipur City (South) (Raj.) for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 406 & 409 of IPC. After completion of investigation, police filed charge-sheet in this matter for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 406, 409 & 120B of IPC. 2. The first bail application filed on behalf of the petitioner was dismissed as withdrawn by this court vide order dated 27.01.2025 while giving liberty to renew the prayer for bail under section 437(6) of Cr.PC before the learned trial court. Thereafter, bail application was preferred before the learned trial Court however, [2025:RJ-JP:24650] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-8305/2025] same has been dismissed thus, this second bail application has been preferred. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that admittedly, charges were framed on 27.02.2025 and date was fixed for recording prosecution evidence of three witnesses including complainant. It is submitted that on the said date, complainant did not turn up and two witnesses, who were present, were not examined by the prosecution thereafter, witnesses did not turn up before the learned trial Court despite issuance of bailable warrant. He contends that there are no criminal antecedents against the petitioner and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. He further argues that petitioner is facing magistrate trial and is in custody since 11.09.2024 and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the prayer of bail made by learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that time was sought by the petitioner herself on the first date fixed for recording evidence therefore, she is not entitled to be released on bail. 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 petitioner, especially looking to the fact that petitioner is facing magistrate trial as also the fact that there are no criminal antecedents against the petitioner and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion as well as looking to the [2025:RJ-JP:24650] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-8305/2025] custody period, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it fit and proper to allow this second bail application. 7. This second bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner Nikita Bangar W/o Shri Sahil Baig D/o Rajendra Bangar 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 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. 8. The observation made hereinabove is 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 /34