[2025:RJ-JP:45723] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 13422/2025 Deepti Jain W/o Vishal Jain, Aged About 45 Years, R/o House No. 99, Jaijawan Colony 3Rd, Tonk Road, P.s. Bajaj Nagar Jaipur (At Present Accused Confined In Central Jail, Jaipur) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Swadeep Hora with Mr. Sahajveer Baweja Mr. Himanshu Agarwal For Respondent(s) For Complainant(s) : : Mr. Naresh Kumar Gupta, PP with Mr. Shubham Sain, AAAG Mr. Vibhuti Bhushan Sharma Ms. Anindya Gupta Mr. Harshit Tiwari HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAMIL KUMAR MATHUR Order 13/11/2025 1. The petitioner has filed this bail application under Section 483 of BNSS in FIR No.149/2025 registered at Police Station Adarsh Nagar, Jaipur City (East), Jaipur for offence under Sections 318(4) and 316(2) of BNS, 2023. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Public Prosecutor and counsel for the complainant and perused the material available on record. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that allegation against the present petitioner is of taking jewellery from the present complainant valued at Rs. 1.55 crore to sell in the [2025:RJ-JP:45723] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-13422/2025] market on commission basis and as against that, petitioner has given the cheque amount of Rs. 70 lac to the complainant though there is allegation of dishonour of that cheque also but this is the case of pure civil in nature as allegation is that petitioner has not paid the amount for the jewellery which has been taken on commission basis from the complainant. He argued that petitioner is a lady aged 45 years and behind the bars since 23.09.2025. His contention is that though there are three cases referred as previous antecedents against her but in all those cases she has been on bail. Charge-sheet in this case has been filed, therefore, no fruitful purpose would be served by custodial interrogation of the petitioner and the bail application of the petitioner may be allowed. 4. Learned counsel for the complainant has vehemently opposed the bail application. Learned counsel for the complainant urged that the petitioner is in regular habit of taking ornaments and giving cheques with dishonest intention which is evident from her criminal antecedents. He further urged that if the petitioner is granted benefit of bail, she will further indulge in such type of activities, therefore, looking to the gravity and nature of offfence, petitioner is not entitled for bail and the bail application may be dismissed.. 5. Learned Public Prosecutor has also vehemently opposed the bail application. 6. On consideration of the rival submissions and material available on record and in the light of submission made by learned counsel for the parties but without expressing any opinion on [2025:RJ-JP:45723] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-13422/2025] merits/demerits of the case, I am inclined to grant benefit of bail to the petitioner. 7. Consequently, the bail application under Section 483 B.N.S.S. is allowed and it is directed that the petitioner Deepti Jain W/o Vishal Jain be released on bail provided she furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court with the stipulation that she shall appear before that Court on all subsequent dates of hearing till conclusion of the trial. (PRAMIL KUMAR MATHUR),J bmg/105