[2025:RJ-JP:38381] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 10695/2025 Rishi @ Golu S/o Ravindra Kumar, R/o House No. 41, Ma Bhagwati Vihar Colony, Opposite Ekta Police Chouki, Police Station Tajganj, District Agra (U.P.). (Presently In District Jail Kota) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent Connected With S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 10803/2025 Neeraj S/o Shri Ganga Ram, R/o Beerman Jagner, P.s. Jagner, District Agra (U.P.), At Present Madhuvan Kunj Colony, Kherai Mode, P.s Taazganj, District Agra (U.P.) (Accused At Present Confined In Central Jail Kota). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Umesh Vyas Mr. Samarth Sharma For Respondent(s) For Complainant(s) : : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP with Mr. Gaurav Gupta, Asst. G.A. Mr. Vivek Gaur HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 18/09/2025 1. These bail applications have been filed under Section 483 of BNSS on behalf of the petitioners, who have been arrested in connection with FIR No.14/2025 registered at Police Station Cyber Police Station (Kota City), District Kota City for offences under Section 318(4) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (in short, ‘BNS’), 2023 and 66D of I.T. Act. Investigation is being conducted for offences punishable under Sections 318(4) & 319(2) of BNS, 2023 and Section 66D of I.T. Act. [2025:RJ-JP:38381] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-10695/2025] 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that the accused-petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. It is contended that alleged offences are triable by Magistrate. It is contended that money dispute has been resolved by the parties amicably. It is submitted that there are no criminal antecedents against the petitioners and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. It is submitted that petitioners are in custody since their date of arrest and further custody of the petitioners would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioners. 4. Learned counsel for the complainant does not dispute the factum of compromise. 5. I have considered the contentions. 6. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, especially considering the fact that alleged offences are triable by Magistrate, as also the fact that parties have resolved their dispute amicably, so also the fact that there are no criminal antecedents against the petitioners and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it proper to allow these bail applications. 7. These bail applications are accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioners (1) Rishi @ Golu S/o Ravindra Kumar, and (2) Neeraj S/o Shri Ganga Ram, shall be released on bail provided each of them furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) [2025:RJ-JP:38381] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-10695/2025] 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. 8. The observations made hereinabove are only for decision of these bail applications and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J CHARU SONI /144-145