[2025:RJ-JP:15377] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 2221/2025 Akram S/o Harun, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Gadhaner, Police Station Pahari, District Deeg, Rajasthan. (At Present Accused- Petitioners Confined In Sub Jail Deeg) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ankit Khandelwal For Respondent(s) : Ms. Arti Sharma, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 07/04/2025 1. The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS, on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.315/2024 registered at Police Station Pahari, District Deeg (Raj.) for the offences punishable under Sections 319(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 308(2) & 61(2)(b) of BNS and Section 66D of IT Act. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel submits that petitioner was not apprehended at the spot and he has been made accused solely on the basis of disclosure made by the co-accused who was apprehended at the spot. Counsel submits that co-accused has already been granted benefit of bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 02.01.2025. Petitioner is in custody since 22.01.2025 and trial of [2025:RJ-JP:15377] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-2221/2025] the case will take considerable time in its conclusion. Further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner. She submits that one another case of similar nature has been registered against the petitioner. 4. I have considered the contentions. 5. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by counsel for the petitioner, as also the fact that petitioner was not apprehended at the spot; co-accused of this case has been granted benefit of bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court; looking to the custody period, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it proper to allow the bail application. 6. This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner -Akram S/o Harun, shall be released on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five 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 in first week of every month in the concerned police station, till trial is concluded. [2025:RJ-JP:15377] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-2221/2025] 8. Concerned SHO is directed to maintain a register recording the attendance of the petitioner, as directed above. In case the petitioner fails 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 breach of any 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. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J LALIT MOHAN /151