[2025:RJ-JP:35121] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 10632/2025 1. Jitendra S/o Rajendra, Aged About 35 Years, 2. Mamraj S/o Rajendra, Aged About 29 Years, Both R/o Chhapuda Kalan, Police Station Shahpura, District Jaipur Rural. (At Present In Central Jail, Jaipur). ----Accused-Petitioners Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ajeet Singh Devanda, Adv., with Mr. Sarthak Chobey, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP with Mr. Tapesh Agarwal, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 01/09/2025 1. The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS on behalf of the petitioners, who have been arrested in connection with FIR No.337/2024 registered at Police Station Shahpura, District Jaipur Rural for the offences punishable under Sections 420 and 409 of IPC. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that the accused-petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. Learned counsel submits that there is allegation of embezzlement of Rs.4,82,600/- and same has been deposited by the petitioners under protest. He further submits that alleged offences are triable by Magistrate. He contends that trial of the case will take considerable time in its conclusion. He further contends that the petitioners are in custody since 17.07.2025 and further custody of the petitioners would not serve any fruitful purpose. [2025:RJ-JP:35121] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-10632/2025] 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners. 4. I have considered the contentions. 5. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioners, especially the fact that amount which was embezzled by the petitioners has already been deposited by them; alleged offences are triable by Magistrate 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 proper to allow the bail application. 6. This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioners – 1. Jitendra S/o Rajendra, and 2. Mamraj S/o Rajendra shall be released on bail provided each of them 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 they 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. 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 MADAN/194