[2025:RJ-JP:28543] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 2610/2025 Shubham Nayak S/o Bahadur, Aged About 23 Years, R/o Chhavni Pathan Baba Ki Gali, Near Moti Maharaj, Kota, Police Station Gumanpura Kota, District Kota (Rajasthan) (At Present Confined In District Jail Bundi, District Bundi). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent Connected With S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 2970/2025 Paras Vaishnav S/o Satyanarayan, Aged About 22 Years, R/o Near Pilot School, Bibnava Road, Bundi, Police Station Sadar, District Bundi (Raj.) (At Present Confined In District Jail, Bundi (Raj.) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Nitin Kumar Sharma Mr. Gajendra Vyas For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP with Mr. Tapesh Agarwal, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 29/07/2025 1. These instant bail applications have been filed under Section 483 of BNSS, on behalf of the petitioners, who have been arrested in connection with FIR No.01/2025 registered at Cyber Police Station (Bundi), District Bundi (Raj.) for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4) & 319(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, [2025:RJ-JP:28543] (2 of 4) [CRLMB-2610/2025] (in short ‘BNS’) 2023 and Section 66D of Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008. Investigation is being conducted in this matter for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 319(2) & 61(2) of BNS, 2023 & Section 66D of Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that the accused-petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel submit that alleged offences are triable by Magistrate. Counsel submit that no evidence is available on record to connect the petitioners with the alleged crime. Counsel submit that it has been alleged in the charge-sheet that petitioners have used the bank account of complainant for committing the offence as several transactions were made by the petitioners from the said bank account however, Investigating Agency failed to collect any incriminating evidence against the petitioners. It is contended that there are no criminal antecedents against the petitioners and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. Counsel submit that petitioner- Shubham Nayak is in custody since 02.02.2025 and petitioner- Paras Vaishnav is in custody since 03.02.2025. Further custody of the petitioners would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioners and submits that bank account of the complainant was being operated by the petitioners. He further submits that in a short span of time, transactions amounting to approximately Two Crore Rupees were made from the said bank account. 4. I have considered the contentions. [2025:RJ-JP:28543] (3 of 4) [CRLMB-2610/2025] 5. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioners, especially considering the material available on record in the form of case diary, as also considering the fact that alleged offences are triable by Magistrate, there are no criminal antecedents against the petitioners and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion as well as looking to the custody period, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it proper to allow these bail applications. 6. These bail applications are accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioners – 1.) Shubham Nayak S/o Bahadur and 2.) Paras Vaishnav S/o Satyanarayan shall be released on bail provided each of them 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 they 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-petitioners shall not involve in any other offence(s) during currency of the bail and they shall mark their presence in first week of every month in the concerned police station. 8. Concerned SHO is directed to maintain a register recording the attendance of the petitioners, as directed above. In case the petitioners fail to mark their presence in the concerned police [2025:RJ-JP:28543] (4 of 4) [CRLMB-2610/2025] station, as directed above, the concerned SHO is directed to immediately report the matter to the concerned Court in this regard. 9. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the concerned SHO for necessary compliance. 10. If any breach 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 them by this Court. 11. The observation made hereinabove is only for decision of the instant bail application and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J GAUTAM JAIN /47-48