[2025:RJ-JP:33183] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 8621/2025 Shakir Qureshi S/o Hajiramjan Qureshi, Aged About 41 Years, R/o Kasaiyo Ki Mori, Chomu Police Station Chomu Jaipur At Present Lala Qureshi Ka Makaan S.D.M. Court Ke Piche, Near Girls Hostal, Police Station Dudu Jaipur Rural (At Present In Central Jail, Jaipur). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Javed Mohd. Khan For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP Mr. Tapesh Agarwal, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 05/08/2025 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.236/2025 registered at Police Station Bagru, District Jaipur (West) for the offence punishable under Section 303(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (in short, ‘BNS’), 2023. After completion of investigation, police filed charge-sheet in this matter for the offences punishable under Sections 123, 61(2), 303(2) and 317(2) of BNS, 2023. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. It is submitted that alleged offences are triable by Magistrate. Learned counsel submits that other co-accused persons, namely- Babulal Choudhary, Bhupendra Kumar and Rajkumar have been granted benefit of bail by learned trial court. It is contended that trial will take considerable time in [2025:RJ-JP:33183] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-8621/2025] its conclusion. Counsel argues that petitioner is behind the bars since 15.06.2025 and no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner behind the bars. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner. It is submitted that allegation against the petitioner is that he drugged the truck driver and looted 450 bags of almonds loaded in the truck and sold the same to co- accused persons of this case. It is submitted that car purchased by the petitioner by selling the looted goods has already been recovered from his possession. It is submitted that case of the petitioner is different from that of the co-accused persons who have been granted benefit of bail by learned trial court as only allegation against the co-accused persons was that they received the stolen/looted almonds from the petitioner. 4. I have considered the contentions. 5. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the arguments advanced by parties, especially considering the material available on record in the form of charge- sheet, as also considering the seriousness of the allegation levelled against the petitioner, so also the role attributed to him thus, looking to the nature and gravity of offence, this court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. 6. Accordingly, this bail application is dismissed. 7. 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 CHARU SONI /233