[2025:RJ-JP:39249] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous II Bail Application No. 11692/2025 Amit Kumar S/o Vijay Singh, Aged About 26 Years, R/o House No. 10, Street No. 18, Sector No. 9C Bokaro Steel City, Police Station Harla, District Bokaro, Jharkhand, Presently Flat No. 107, Vedant Heights Nandpuri, Behind Maharana Pratap Circle, Police Station Pratap Nagar, Jaipur. (At Present Confined In Central Jail Jaipur, District Jaipur). ----Accused-Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Dr. Mithlesh Kumar, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP with Mr. Tapesh Agarwal, PP & Mr. Gaurav Gupta, Asstt.G.A. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 23/09/2025 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.430/2021 registered at Police Station Sanganer Sadar, District Jaipur City (South) for offences punishable under Sections 389, 420, 406 and 120B of IPC. After completion of investigation, police filed charge-sheet in this matter. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. It is submitted that earlier, benefit of bail was granted to the petitioner by co-ordinate bench of this court vide order dated 05.10.2021 [2025:RJ-JP:39249] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-11692/2025] however, later on, same was cancelled vide order dated 11.05.2022. It is submitted that petitioner has issued demand draft of Rs.10,11,000/- in favour of the complainant and same has been encashed by him. According to the FIR, there was money dispute between the parties with regard to sale of two plots for which Rs.10,11,000/- was paid by the complainant. It is contended that trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. Counsel submits that petitioner is in custody since 02.08.2025 and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner. He submits that complainant of this case has duly been informed about hearing of this bail application. 4. Despite information, no one has put in appearance on behalf of the complainant to oppose the bail application. 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 petitioner, especially considering the fact that amount mentioned in the FIR has already been paid by the petitioner to the complainant through demand draft 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 second bail application. [2025:RJ-JP:39249] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-11692/2025] 7. This second bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner - Amit Kumar S/o Vijay Singh 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 bail application and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J MADAN/162