[2025:RJ-JP:23660] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 3275/2025 Taufeek S/o Innas, Aged About 26 Years, R/o Village Kathol, Police Station Pahari, District Deeg, Raj. ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent Connected With S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 3558/2025 Mursaleen S/o Haneef, R/o Ghadhaner, Police Station Pahadi, District Deeg (Raj.) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 4624/2025 1. Rafik S/o Hanif, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Vill. Gadhaner, P.s. Pahari, District Deeg (Rajasthan) 2. Aamir S/o Hanif, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Vill. Gadhaner, P.s. Pahari, District Deeg (Rajasthan) ----Petitioners Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : None. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shri Ram Dhakar, Public Prosecutor. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL (V. J.) Order 27/06/2025 1. None present on behalf of the accused-petitioners. [2025:RJ-JP:23660] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-3275/2025] 2. Instant anticipatory bail applications have been filed by accused-petitioner apprehending their arrest in connection with FIR No.266/2024 registered at Police Station Pahari, District Deeg for the offences punishable under Sections 319(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 308(2), 61(2)(B) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 66-D and 66-E of IT Act. 3. Heard learned Public Prosecutor and perused the material available on record. 4. Considering the gravity of the allegations leveled in the FIR, lodged by ASI, Anti-virus Campaign, the accused-petitioners were found committing cyber fraud by misusing the Sim Cards and ATM Cards of other persons; in the preliminary investigation, accused- petitioners were found using electronic devices to commit online fraud with innocent persons by forming a gang; the matter is under investigation and the well-settled principle of law that anticipatory bail is to be granted only in exceptional circumstances, where the court is prima facie satisfied that the accused-petitioner has been falsely implicated and is unlikely to misuse the liberty if granted bail as authoritatively laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Jai Prakash Singh v. State of Bihar [(2012) 4 SCC 379] and reaffirmed in State of Madhya Pradesh v. Pradeep Sharma [AIR 2014 SC 626], this Court finds it difficult to discern, at this stage, that the accused- petitioner has falsely been implicated in this matter nor any exceptional circumstances are there, and therefore, this Court is not inclined to grant benefit of pre-arrest bail to the accused- petitioners. [2025:RJ-JP:23660] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-3275/2025] 5. Accordingly, these anticipatory bail applications stand dismissed. (SUDESH BANSAL (V. J.)),J Tushar/53-55