[2025:RJ-JP:32697] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Second Bail Application No. 9010/2025 Avinash Sharma @ Sablu S/o Omprakash, Aged About 35 Years, Resident Of Gadhi Thoriyan, Gopal Nagar, Beawar, Police Station Beawar City, District Beawar (Raj.). (At Present At Confined In Central Jail, Jhalawar) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Shantnu Bansal For Respondent(s) For Complainant(s) : : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP Mr. Anubodh Subodh Jain HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 20/08/2025 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.418/2024 registered at Jhalrapatan, District Jhalawar (Rajasthan) for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4) and 316(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, (in short ‘BNS’) 2023. After completion of investigation, police filed charge-sheet in this matter for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 316(2) and 61(2)(a) of BNS, 2023. 2. The first bail application filed on behalf of the petitioner was dismissed vide order dated 26.03.2025 while giving liberty to file fresh bail application before the learned trial Court under the provisions of Section 480(6) of BNSS (corresponding to Section 437(6) of Cr.PC). Thereafter, petitioner filed fresh bail application [2025:RJ-JP:32697] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-9010/2025] before the learned trial Court and same was dismissed. Now, this second bail application has been preferred. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel submits that it is a matter of business transaction and same has been admitted by the complainant during the course of his testimony. Counsel submits that alleged offences are triable by Magistrate. Counsel submits that co-accused Bhumika Sharma has already been granted benefit of bail by this Court. Counsel further relies upon the order dated 21.03.2025 passed by Hon’ble Apex Court in Special Leave Petition (Crl.) Nos.18148-18151 of 2024 titled as ‘Kamla Devi Agarwal & Ors. versus State of Rajasthan & Anr.’ wherein, identical facts and circumstances, benefit of anticipatory bail was extended to the accused persons. It is contended that there are no criminal antecedents against the petitioner and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. Counsel contends that petitioner is in custody since 18.11.2024 and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor assisted by learned counsel for the complainant vehemently oppose the prayer for bail made by learned counsel for the petitioner. It is submitted that there is serious allegation against the petitioner that despite receiving huge amount of money in his account, he did not supply the goods to the complainant. 5. I have considered the contentions. 6. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances [2025:RJ-JP:32697] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-9010/2025] of the case; considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, especially considering the observations made by Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Kamla Devi Agarwal (Supra), as also considering the fact that alleged offences are triable by Magistrate, so also the fact that co-accused Bhumika Sharma has already been granted benefit of bail by this Court, there are no criminal antecedents against the petitioner and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion as well as looking to the period of custody, 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 Avinash Sharma @ Sablu S/o Omprakash shall be released on bail provided he 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 he 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 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 LALIT MOHAN /103