[2025:RJ-JP:51148] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Second Bail Application No. 16083/2025 Balveer Vaishnav S/o Shri Radheshyam, Aged About 42 Years, R/o Anand Vihar Colony, Dhani Road, Ward No. 01, Kishangarh, P.s. Gandhinagar, District Ajmer. (At Present Confined In Central Jail Ajmer). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Devanshu Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP with Mr. M.S. Shekhawat, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 18/12/2025 1. The instant 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.133/2025 registered at Police Station Gandhi Nagar, District Ajmer for the offence punishable under Section 303(2) of BNS, 2023. After completion of investigation, police has filed the charge-sheet in this matter for the offences punishable under Sections 316(2), 61(2), 318(4) & 111(2)(b) of BNS, 2023 and Sections 3, 21 & 5 of Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes Act, 2019. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the first bail application filed on behalf of the petitioner was dismissed vide order dated 28.08.2025, considering the fact that the investigation was going on. Counsel submits that the charge-sheet has been filed and, thus, this second bail application has been preferred. [2025:RJ-JP:51148] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-16083/2025] 3. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and he is simultaneously facing nine other cases arising out of similar allegations. It is submitted that in one such FIR involving identical allegations, the petitioner has already been granted bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 09.12.2025. Counsel argues that trial of the case will take considerable time in its conclusion. Petitioner is in custody since 08.07.2025 and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application and submitted that the petitioner is a habitual offender and that nine criminal cases have been registered against him. 4. I have considered the contentions. 5. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, and considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner, particularly the fact that in an identical matter the benefit of bail has already been extended to the petitioner by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in FIR No. 135/2025, Police Station Gandhi Nagar Ajmer; and further taking into account the period of custody undergone by the petitioner as well as the filing of the charge-sheet, but without expressing any opinion on the merits or demerits of the case, this Court deems it proper to allow the bail application. 6. This second bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner–Balveer Vaishnav S/o Shri Radheshyam shall be released on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh [2025:RJ-JP:51148] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-16083/2025] Only) together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty 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. 7. 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 once in three months in the concerned police station. 8. Concerned SHO is directed to maintain a register recording the attendance of the petitioner, as directed above. In case the petitioner fail to mark his presence in the concerned police station, as directed above, the concerned SHO is directed to immediately report the matter to the concerned Court in this regard. 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. Office is directed to send copy of this order to the concerned SHO for necessary compliance. 11. The observations made hereinabove is only for decision of the instant bail application and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J Arun/19