[2025:RJ-JP:38350] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 11844/2025 Rahul Kumar S/o Narayan Lal, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Pareeta, Police Station Kudgaon, District Karauli, Presently Resident Of R.k. Puram Quarter No. 27, Type-1, New Delhi, Police Station, R.k. Puram, District Delhi (South) 110022. (Presently Confined In Sub Jail, Lalsot, District Dausa). ----Petitioner Versus The State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajneesh Gupta, Ms. Chanchal, Mr. Rahul Sharma, Mr. Utkarsh Goyal For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shree Ram Dhakar, PP, Mr. Ravindra Singh Shekhawat for complainant HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR Order 18/09/2025 1. The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 BNSS on behalf of accused-petitioner. The accused-petitioner has been arrested in connection with FIR No. 248/2023 registered at Police Station Ramgarh Panchwara, District Dausa for the offences under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 406, 409 and 120-B of IPC. 2. Learned counsel for the accused-petitioner submits that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that the petitioner along with the other co-accused on the pretext of providing employment to the complainant and the witnesses has issued forged appointment letters in the name [2025:RJ-JP:38350] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-11844/2025] of Manisha, Dilkhush, Mukesh, Mamta and Rakesh. It is also contended that in the FIR, the main allegation is against co- accused Ramesh and it is alleged that co-accused Ramesh received the amount in his account through mobile and no transaction was ever made by the complainants in the account of petitioner. The petitioner has not forged any document and there is no report that the petitioner has issued appointment letters to the complainants. The petitioner is a Government Official and posted in Home Ministry at Delhi. The offences alleged against the petitioner are exclusively triable by Magistrate and trial of the case may take considerable time, therefore, the bail application of the accused-petitioner may be allowed. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor as well as learned counsel for the complainant have vehemently opposed the bail application and contended that the petitioner along with other co-accused Ramesh conspired and thereafter induced complainants to give money on pretext of providing them with employment in the Home Ministry. The petitioner has also supplied fake appointment letters to the complainants and also marked their presence falsely in his office and some amount was also given to the petitioner and video was also captured showing that the petitioner's receiving the amount from the complainant, therefore, the bail application of the accused-petitioner may be dismissed. 4. Heard and perused the material available on record. 5. In the case diary, there is no existence of any such record showing that the petitioner has received money from the complainant. The police has not recovered any register in which petitioner was making alleged false presence of the complainants [2025:RJ-JP:38350] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-11844/2025] and no amount was transferred in the account of the petitioner. In the FIR, the main allegation of receiving the money from the complainants is against co-accused Ramesh. The offences alleged against the petitioner are exclusively triable by Magistrate. The accused-petitioner is in custody since 30.08.2025 and further trial of the case may take considerable time and there are no criminal antecedents against the accused-petitioner, therefore, considering the above facts, I deem it just and proper to enlarge the accused- petitioner on bail. 6. Accordingly, the bail application under Section 483 BNSS is allowed and it is ordered that the accused-petitioner Rahul Kumar S/o Narayan Lal, in connection with FIR No. 248/2023 registered at Police Station Ramgarh Panchwara, District Dausa, shall be enlarged on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for his appearance before the court concerned on all the dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so. (PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J Keshav/14