[2025:RJ-JP:9437] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 1117/2025 Laxmi Kant @ Lucky Rana S/o Shri Nandlal, R/o 3-F-44 Dadabadi Vistar Yojana, Extension, Nasiya Ji Mandir Ke Pass, Kota Rajasthan ( Accused At Present Confined In Central Jail Kota) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Samarth Sharma For Respondent(s) : Ms. Arti Sharma, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 04/03/2025 1. The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS, on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.128/2024 registered at Police Station Dadabadi, District Kota City (Rajasthan) for the offences punishable under Sections 420 & 406 of IPC. Later on, police filed charge-sheet in this matter for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 406 & 120B of IPC, Sections 3, 21, 5 & 23 of Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes Act (in short ‘BUDS’) Act and Sections 3, 4, 5 & 6 of Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1978. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. According to the prosecution case, there is allegation against the petitioner that he induced the complainant to invest money in [2025:RJ-JP:9437] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-1117/2025] different schemes. It has been alleged in the FIR that a total amount of Rs. 36,50,000/- (Thirty Six Lakh Fifty Thousand Rupees) was given by the complainant to the petitioner in which, Rs. 26,50,000- (Twenty Six Lakh Fifty Thousand Rupees) has been given through banking channels and Rs.10,00,000/- (Ten Lakh Rupees) has been given in cash. Counsel submits that Rs.24,78,358/- (Twenty Four Lakh Seventy Eight Thousand Three Hundred Fifty Eight Rupees) through bank has been returned to the complainant. Counsel submits that charge-sheet has been filed and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. Counsel submits that in this case, formal arrest of the petitioner has been made on 04.10.2024. Further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned State Counsel opposes the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner. She submits that five other cases of similar nature have been registered against the petitioner. 4. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in one of the case, facility of pre-arrest bail has been granted to the petitioner by Hon’ble Apex Court. 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, as also the material made available in the form of charge-sheet as well as looking to the custody period, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it proper to allow the bail application. 7. This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed [2025:RJ-JP:9437] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-1117/2025] that accused-petitioner Laxmikant @ Lucky Rana S/o Shri Nandlal, 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. It is made clear that the accused petitioner shall not involve in any other similar offence during currency of the bail. After being released from prison, he shall mark his presence in first week of every month in the concerned police station. 9. 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. 10. The SHO concerned is directed to maintain a register recording attendance of the accused, as mentioned above. In case, the petitioner fails to mark his attendance as mentioned above, the SHO shall intimate the trial court immediately. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J LALIT MOHAN /26