[2025:RJ-JP:38266] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 9795/2025 Sandeep Kumar @ Leelu S/o Jagdevaram, Aged About 39 Years, R/o Hukampura, Police Station Gudhagorji, District Jhunjhunu (Raj.). (Presently Lodged In District Jail Jhunjhunu). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Chain Singh Rathore For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP with Mr. Gaurav Gupta, Asst. G.A. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 18/09/2025 1. This bail application has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS, on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.285/2025 registered at Police Station Gudha, District Jhunjhunu for offence punishable under Section 19/54 of Rajasthan Excise Act, 1950. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Learned counsel contends that alleged offence is triable by Magistrate. It is contended that there are no criminal antecedents against the petitioner of similar nature and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. Counsel submits that petitioner is in custody since 03.07.2025 and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. [2025:RJ-JP:38266] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-9795/2025] 3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposes the prayer for bail made by learned counsel for the petitioner. He submits that petitioner is a habitual offender as six other cases have been registered against him however, he fairly concedes that none of the case has been registered under the provisions of Rajasthan Excise Act, 1950. 4. Heard. Perused the material available on record. 5. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances; considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, as also considering the fact that alleged offence is triable by Magistrate and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion as well as looking to the custody period, but without expressing any opinion on merits/demerits of this case, I deem it proper to allow the bail application. 6. This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner - Sandeep Kumar @ Leelu S/o Jagdevaram, 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. 7. It is made clear that the accused-petitioner shall not involve in any other offence(s) during currency of the bail and he shall mark his presence in first week of every month in the concerned [2025:RJ-JP:38266] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-9795/2025] police station, 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 his 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 any breach 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 him 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 bail application and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J CHARU SONI /134