[2025:RJ-JP:50800] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 13105/2025 Mohammad Rashid @ Sonu S/o Rajjak Mohammad, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Purani Jail Road, Near Imam Sagar Masjid, Jhalawar, Police Station Kotwali Jhalawar, District Jhalawar (Rajasthan) (At Present Confined In District Jail Jhalawar). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ajay Singh Yaduvanshi For Respondent(s) : Mr. Onkar Singh Rajpurohit,P.P. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI Order 16/12/2025 1. The present bail application has been filed under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. on behalf of the accused-petitioner, namely Mohammad Rashid @ Sonu S/o Rajjak Mohammad, in connection with FIR No.585/2025 registered at Police Station Kotwali Jhalawar, District Jhalawar for the offence(s) under Section(s) 318(4), 316(2) & 61(2) of B.N.S. 2. Learned counsel for the accused-petitioner submits that the accused-petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case, he has nothing to do with the alleged offences and he is behind the bars since 19.09.2025. The case is triable by a Court of Magistrate and the petitioner is no longer required for the purpose of investigation. Looking to the overall facts & circumstances of the case, the petitioner is entitled for regular bail in this matter. [2025:RJ-JP:50800] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-13105/2025] 3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the bail application and submitted that the present case pertains to cyber crime and the petitioner, who is a mobile repairer by profession, had transactions amounting to more than Rs.1,70,00,000/- through his bank account. Apart from the present FIR, nine other cyber crime complaints have also been lodged against the petitioner. Thus, the bail application filed under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. deserves to be dismissed. 4. Having heard learned counsel for both the parties and perusing the evidence adduced during investigation, prima facie it appears that transactions amounting to more than Rs.1,70,00,000/- were routed through the bank account of the petitioner during the period from 01.01.2024 to 15.04.2025, and nine other cyber crime complaints are pending against him. 5. Thus, without commenting upon the merits/demerits of the case and looking to the overall facts and circumstances of the case, this Court does not deem it appropriate to grant the benefit of regular bail to the accused-petitioner. 6. Accordingly, the instant bail application filed under Section 483 B.N.S.S. is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh application, in case there is no substantial progress in the trial within a period of six months. (VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI),J SAURABH /77