[2025:RJ-JP:47737] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 4083/2025 Mukesh Kumar Sharma S/o Shri Chitarmal Sharma, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Dhigariya, Tehsil Thanagaji, District Alwar (Raj.). ----Applicant Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Avtar Singh Rathore, Mr. Satyam Upman For Respondent(s) : Ms. Arti Sharma, PP with Mr. Rhishi Raj Singh Rathore, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN Order 25/11/2025 1. The present bail application has been filed under Section 482 BNSS in connection with FIR No.23/2023 registered at Police Station SOG, Jaipur for the offence(s) under Sections 420 & 120-B of IPC and 43/66, 72, 72A of IT Act. 2. In the instant matter, interim protection was granted to the accused-applicant vide order dated 27.03.2025, and the same was continued till date. 3. Learned counsel for the accused-applicant has submitted that the applicant is a police personnel in the State of Rajasthan, and while carrying out official duties, allegations of providing the Call Detail Records (CDR) and other personal information have been levelled against the applicant. Howsoever, learned counsel for the applicant is not aware of the fact as to whether any [2025:RJ-JP:47737] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-4083/2025] disciplinary proceedings have been initiated against the accused- applicant or not. 4. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the instant bail application. It is submitted that the applicant, while discharging his official duties, as a police officer, not only demanded and accepted the bribe but also provided and circulated confidential information of innocent persons, which is wholly unbecoming of a government servant, particularly a uniformed police officer. It is further submitted that the matter is still under investigation as to ascertain since when and in what manner and capacity, the applicant has been involved in such activities, and whether misconduct of the applicant is confined only to the present case or extends over multiple transactions of similar nature in the past. It is also submitted that anticipatory bail is a remedy of extraordinary nature and should be granted only in exceptional circumstances. 5. Having heard the contentions put-forth by the learned counsel for the parties and taking note of the fact that the applicant has grossly misused his position, while discharging official duties; that the grave allegations of circulating the sensitive and confidential information of innocent persons have been levelled against the applicant and looking to the overall facts and circumstances of the case and material on record but without commenting on merits/demerits of the case, this court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. 6. Accordingly, the present bail application is dismissed. (SAMEER JAIN),J CHANDAN /236