[2025:RJ-JP:38058] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous II Bail Application No. 8597/2025 Bhupendra Singh @ Raju S/o Shrawan Singh, R/o Pithda, Mandawar (Kachhwali), Police Station Devgarh, District Rajsamand. (Presently Confined In Central Jail Jaipur). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sarthak Choubey For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shree Ram Dhakar, PP Mr. Manvendra Singh Choudhary, PP Mr. Sanjay Gangwar, for complainant HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 03/09/2025 This is second bail application under Section 483 BNSS, filed on behalf of the petitioner who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.05/2024 PS Special Police Station (SOG), Jaipur District ATS & SOJ for offences under Sections 285, 379, 411, 440, 120B IPC, Sections 15(1) and 15(2) of Petroleum & Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962, Sections 15(3), 15(4) and 16 of Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Amendment Act, 2011, Section 3, 4 of Explosives Substances Act, 1984 and Sections 3,4 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984. First bail application (No.10522/2024) filed on behalf of the accused petitioner was dismissed on 03.02.2025. [2025:RJ-JP:38058] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-8597/2025] Learned counsel for the accused petitioners submit that the accused petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Learned counsel submits that the accused petitioner is not named in the FIR. He is in custody since 11.07.2024. His custodial interrogation is no more required for any purpose. He does not have any criminal antecedents. No fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the accused behind the bars for indefinite time as trial will take long time in its conclusion. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor as well as learned counsel for the IOCL oppose the bail applications. It is contended that first bail application was dismissed on merits and after rejection of the first bail application, there happened no substantial change in circumstances. It is thus prayed that the instant second bail application may be dismissed. By order dated 03.02.2025, the first bail application was dismissed on merits. No substantial change in circumstance has occasioned thereafter. Thus, I am not inclined to accept the instant second bail application. Hence, this second bail application is dismissed. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J CHARU SONI /81