[2025:RJ-JP:51784] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 16427/2025 Hitesh Kumar S/o Shri Ram Chandra, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Village Bhojawas, Tehsil Kanina, District Mahendragarh, Haryana. ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ankur Rastogi, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP Mr. M.S. Shekhawat, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 17/12/2025 1. This pre-arrest bail application under Section 482 of BNSS has been filed on behalf of the petitioner, who is having apprehension of arrest in connection with with FIR No.291/2025 registered at Police Station C.P.S. Jaipur, ACB District for offences punishable under Sections 7, 7A & 12 of Prevention of Corruption (Amendment) Act, 2018 and Sections 238 & 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, (in short ‘BNS’) 2023. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case as there is no evidence on record to connect him. Counsel submits that alleged recovery of bribe amount was not made possession of the petitioner. In such circumstances, no fruitful purpose would be served by sending the petitioner behind the bar. Hence, this pre-arrest bail may be allowed. [2025:RJ-JP:51784] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-16427/2025] 3. Learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposes the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. He submits that there is serious allegation of demanding bribe and thus, this pre-arrest bail should be dismissed. 4. I have considered the rival submissions made by the counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 5. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced at bar, especially considering the fact that in the case diary, sufficient evidence is available in the shape of transcript showing the involvement of the petitioner in the alleged crime as well as looking to the serious allegation against the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to extend the indulgence of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner at this stage. 6. Accordingly, this pre-arrest bail application stands dismissed. 7. The observations made hereinabove are only for decision of this bail application and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J Manoj Solanki /c-1