[2025:RJ-JP:34830] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 2 nd Bail Application No. 10380/2024 Kuldeep Singh S/o Shri Surendra Singh, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Surajpura, Police Station Viratnagar, District Jaipur, Currently Residing At Anandpur Kalu Sharab Theka, Village Kalu Tehsil Jaitaran, District Pali, Rajasthan. (Accused Petitioner At Present Confined In Central Jail Jaipur). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajesh Kala For Respondent(s) : Ms. Arti Sharma, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN Order 22/08/2025 1. Instant 2nd bail application is preferred by applicant-accused Kuldeep Singh S/o Shri Surendra Singh under Section 483 of BNSS in a matter arising out of FIR No.8/2022 registered with Special Police Station CID Security, Jaipur for offence under Sections 3, 6 and 9 of the Official Secrets Act, 1923 and Sections 66-C, 66-D of IT Act and Section 420 of IPC. 2. The first bail application of present applicant-accused is dismissed on 11.09.2023 and now 2nd bail application is filed on [2025:RJ-JP:34830] (2 of 4) [CRLMB-10380/2024] ground of slow progress of the case and also completion of 1/3rd period of sentence in custody. 3. Learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant is in custody since 14.08.2022 and till date, he has completed 1/3rd of the sentence prescribed for the offence. He further submitted that till date, the trial has not concluded and the allegation on present applicant is only with regard to transfer of ₹4,000/-, and there is no other material to justify involvement of present applicant. He further submits that this Hon’ble Court has called status report from the Trial Court and it indicate that the trial will take further time and applicant-accused is entitled for bail on ground of delay in trial. He also submits that the offence is triable by the 1st Class Magistrate and even after filing the charge-sheet, further investigation is kept pending and still, role and involvement of present applicant is not proved. He submitted that after completion of pre-charge evidence, the trial will begin after framing charge. 4. Aforesaid contentions were opposed by learned Public Prosecutor. She submits that the delay is caused only due to time taken by present applicant and FSL report is already filed on record. She further submits that still the matter is fixed for pre- charge evidence and after concluding pre-charge evidence, the Trial Court will consider for framing of the charge. 5. Heard learned counsel for applicant and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material placed on record. 6. The applicant-accused is facing a serious charge under the Official Secrets Act and IT Act and Criminal Case No.151/2023 [2025:RJ-JP:34830] (3 of 4) [CRLMB-10380/2024] pending before learned Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Jaipur Metro-I, and currently pre-charge evidence is in progress and material on record indicate that till 15.07.2025 evidence of 16 witnesses were recorded and on 12.08.2025, Examination-in-Chief of PW-17 Mukesh was recorded but due to time sought by learned counsel for applicant-accused, the statement was deferred. The FSL report is already filed on 01.07.2025. 7. Chapter XX of BNSS provides for trial of warrant cases by Magistrate and Part-(B) of this Chapter provides for trial of cases instituted otherwise then on police report. As of now, pre-charge evidence is recorded under Section 267 of BNSS and likely to conclude very soon and thereafter the matter has to be considered on basis of Sections 268 and 269 of BNSS. Section 269 (4) and (5) provides that in case, accused does not plead guilty then witnesses named by him shall be recalled for cross-examination and re-examination, if any. Thereafter, the remaining witnesses for prosecution shall be recorded. The procedure as prescribed clearly indicate that there is no room for delay and we hope the Trial Court will consider the provision of law to curb delay. 7. Herein this case, FSL report has already been filed on record and witness No.17 is in progress, though applicant is in custody since 14.08.2022 and time period is too much, but considering offence under the Official Secret Act, I am of considered view that instead of granting bail, of applicant-accused, it would be appropriate to expedite the trial and consider the bail application only after the stage of charge. [2025:RJ-JP:34830] (4 of 4) [CRLMB-10380/2024] 8. In view of discussion made herein above, the instant 2nd bail application preferred by applicant-accused Kuldeep Singh S/o Shri Surendra Singh under Section 483 of BNSS is hereby dismissed. The Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude pre-charge evidence as early as possible. (ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J GAURAV /01