[2025:RJ-JP:11563] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 3468/2025 Umardeen S/o Late Mohammad Hanif, Aged About 44 Years, R/o House No. 1170, Ward No. 51, Hakim-Ki-Gali, Moti Doongari Road, Police Station Lal Kothi, Jaipur, Rajasthan. (At Present In Judicial Custody At Central Jail, Jaipur). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Purushottam Sharma, Mr. Mahender Singh Yadav, For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.D. Dhakar, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 12/03/2025 1. Defect(s) as pointed out by the Registry is waived. 2. 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. 282/2024 registered at Police Station Viswakarma, District Jaipur (West) for the offence punishable under Section 379 of IPC. After investigation, offence punishable under section 411 of IPC has also been added. 3. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Learned counsel submit that alleged offences are triable by magistrate and maximum allegation against the petitioner is that he received the stolen articles. It is submitted that other co- accused person namely- Ajhar Mohammed has already been [2025:RJ-JP:11563] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-3468/2025] granted benefit of bail by this Court. It is contended that trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. Petitioner is in custody since 06.02.2025 and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that petitioner is a habitual offender as four other cases have been registered against him. 5. I have considered the contentions. 6. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner, as also the fact that the aforementioned co-accused person has already been granted benefit of bail by this Court and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion as well as looking to the period of custody, but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, I deem it proper to allow the bail application. 7. This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner – Umardeen S/o Late Mohammad Hani, 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. 8. It is made clear that the accused-petitioner shall not involve [2025:RJ-JP:11563] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-3468/2025] in any other offence(s) during currency of the bail and he shall mark his presence in second week of every month in the concerned police station, till trial is concluded. 9. 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. 10. 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 pcg/1063