[2025:RJ-JP:51352] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 14363/2025 Mukesh Rolaniya Son Of Harlal Singh, Aged About 24 Years, Resident Of Village Sewa Ki Dhani, Nimeda, Police Station Jajod, District Sikar, Rajasthan, Presently Tenant At Pavan Choudhary, Flat No. G-1, Plot No. 93, Avadhpuri-A, Nangal Jaisa Bohra, Puliya Ke Pas, Police Station Kardhani, Jaipur (At Present Accused Petitioner Confined In Central Jail Jaipur) ----Applicant Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr.Vidhut Kumar Gupta For Respondent(s) : Mr.Vijay Singh Yadav, P.P. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI CHIRANIA Order 18/12/2025 1. The present bail application has been filed by the applicant under Section 483 B.N.S.S. in connection with the FIR bearing No.347/2025 dated 17.08.2025 for the offences registered against him under Section 103(1), 61(2)(a) of B.N.S. in respect of a road accident which occurred on 16.08.2025. The bail application of the applicant was rejected by the Additional Sessions Judge No.5, Jaipur Metropolitan-II, Jaipur vide order dated 27.10.2025, thereafter, the applicant has preferred this bail application. 2. Learned counsel for the accused-applicant submits that the accused-applicant was not involved in causing any offence as alleged in the impugned FIR and to support this fact, he has submitted the visual description of the incident as collected by the [2025:RJ-JP:51352] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-14363/2025] police from the CCTV cameras, which captured the footage of the incident. On the basis of the description of the incident, it is evident that the present applicant was not in the vehicle when the vehicle hit the deceased, whose wife has lodged the impugned FIR against the applicant. In view of the fact that the accused- applicant is falsely implicated in the present case, as he has not committed any such offence, therefore, he may be enlarged on bail. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor strongly opposed the bail application and submits that other persons are involved in the conspiracy. In view of the above fact, he prayed that the accused- applicant may not be enlarged on bail. 4. This Court considered the fact that description of the incident as recorded in the CCTV footage and the details mentioned in the charge-sheet, the applicant was not in the vehicle when the deceased was hit by the vehicle bearing No. RJ23-UF-1617. 6. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the applicant was not involved in causing any incident as he was not present in the vehicle at the time of accident, this Court is inclined to exercise its power under Section 483 B.N.S.S. and deems it just and proper to enlarge the accused- applicant on bail. 7. Accordingly, the bail application filed under Section 483 B.N.S.S. is allowed and it is directed that accused-applicant - Mukesh Rolaniya S/o Harlal Singh shall be released on bail, provided he executes a personal bond in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sound and solvent sureties of Rs.50,000/- each to the satisfaction of learned trial Court for his appearance before that [2025:RJ-JP:51352] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-14363/2025] Court on each and every date of hearing and whenever called upon to do so till the completion of the trial. The applicant is further directed not to take undue advantage of liberty or misuse liberty. It is made clear that the observation as made by this Court in the bail application will not affect the trial of the case. (RAVI CHIRANIA),J Monika/87