[2025:RJ-JP:37316] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 11616/2025 Monendra @ Monu S/o Atma Ram, Aged About 41 Years, R/o Village Isarda, Police Station Chauth Ka Barwara, District Sawai Madhopur At Present Sitaram Son Of Dhannalal, Aged About 50 Years, Resident Of Near Silolai Ki Talai, Tan Gram Akodiya, Police Station Shivdaspura, District Jaipur At Present Near Tiba Ki Dhani, Behind Surajkund, Town Chaksu, Police Station Chaksu, District Jaipur. (Accused Petitioner Confined At Central Jail, Jaipur). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sandeep Kumar Meena For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP with Mr. Gaurav Gupta, Asstt. G.A. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 15/09/2025 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.378/2020 registered at Police Station Chaksu, District Jaipur City (South) (Rajasthan) for offences punishable under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468 and 471 of IPC. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. It is submitted that alleged offences are triable by Magistrate. Counsel submits that impugned FIR was lodged on 03.09.2020 alleging therein that petitioner induced the complainant to give Rs.5,00,000/- on the pretext of [2025:RJ-JP:37316] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-11616/2025] getting his pasture land converted into residential land from the concerned department. Counsel submits that now, petitioner has been arrested on 21.08.2025. Counsel submits that alleged offences are based on documents and same have already been recovered by the Investigating Agency. It is submitted that trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. Further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner. He submits that one other case of similar nature has also been registered against the petitioner. 4. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in said case, parties have entered into 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 petitioner, especially considering the fact that alleged offences are triable by Magistrate, as also the fact that alleged offences are based on documents which are in possession of the Investigating Agency 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 fit and proper to allow this bail application. 7. The bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner- Monendra @ Monu S/o Atma Ram 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 [2025:RJ-JP:37316] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-11616/2025] 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. 8. 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 police station. 9. Concerned SHO is directed to maintain a register recording the attendance of the petitioner. In case the petitioner fails to mark his presence in the concerned police station, the concerned SHO is directed to immediately report the matter to the concerned Court in this regard. 10. 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. 11. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the concerned SHO for necessary compliance. 12. 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 LALIT MOHAN /155