[2026:RJ-JP:27344] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous IInd Bail Application No. 6769/2026 URN: CRLMB / 12246U / 2026 Sohanram @ Sohan Lal Vishnoi S/o Bhiyaram, R/o Finch, P.s. Luni, Distt. Jodhpur, Presently R/o 132, Ravi Nagar, Pal Road, P.s. Chopasni Housing Board, Jodhpur ( Presently Confined In Central Jail Jaipur) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent Connected With S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous IVth Bail Application No. 10866/2026 URN: CRLMB / 20116U / 2026 Sandeep Gupta Alias Sandy Son Of Shri Vijendra, Aged About 43 Years, R/o E-132 Celebrity Homes Police Station Palan Vihar, District Gurgaon, Haryana (Judicial Custody At Central Jail Jaipur And Presently At Sub Jail Jaitaran, Pali) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajeev Surana,Sr. Adv. assisted by Mr. Parth Vashishtha Ms.Muskan Verma Mr. Anuj Rohilla Ms.Palak Sinha For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rishi Raj Singh Rathore, P.P. with Mr. Shubham Sain,AAAG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 17/07/2026 1. These instant bail applications under Section 483 of BNSS have been filed on behalf of the petitioners, who have been [2026:RJ-JP:27344] (2 of 4) [CRLMB-6769/2026] arrested in connection with FIR No.05/2024 registered at Police Station Special Police Station (SOG), District ATS & SOG for the offence punishable under Section 285, 379, 411, 440, 120-B of IPC and under Section 15(1), 15(2) Petroleum and Mineral Pipe Line Act 1962 and under Section 15(3), 15(4) & 16 of Petroleum and Mineral Pipe Line (Amendment Act 2011) and 3/4 of Explosive Substances Act 1908 under Section 3/4 of P.D.P.P Act 1984 and under Section 7 of E.C. Act. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner- Sohanram @ Sohan Lal Vishnoi that after rejection of the first bail application of the petitioner, co-accused of this case namely- Nishant Karnik has been granted the benefit of bail by the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated 08.05.2026 in SLP (Crl.) No.7107 of 2026 and case of the present petitioner is on the same footing. Learned counsel submits that since facility of bail has already been extended by the Hon'ble Supreme Court to the co-accused and further looking to the fact that petitioner has only two cases pending against him under the provision of NDPS Act, he may be granted the regular bail. Having looking to the incarceration since 07.07.2024, he argues that trial of the case will take considerable time and further custody of the petitioners would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Mr. Rajeev Surana, Sr. Adv. put an appearance for petitioner- Sandeep Gupta and submits that petitioner have been made accused in this case solely on the account that 20 criminal cases were registered against him. Counsel submits that the chart placed alongside with the bail application clearly reflects that in [2026:RJ-JP:27344] (3 of 4) [CRLMB-6769/2026] ten cases petitioner has been acquitted and in rest of the cases he is already on bail. Counsel further submits that petitioner is in custody since 08.08.2024 and in view of the fact that co accused has already been granted the benefit of bail by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, this bail applications filed by the petitioners may be allowed. 4. Learned State counsel assisted by counsel for the complainant /Department (IOC) opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioners and submits that there exists serious allegations against the petitioners that they have stolen the crude from the pipeline of the IOC. 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 both the parties, that the co-accused against whom ten cases were registered of similar nature has been granted the benefit of bail from Hon'ble Supreme Court and further considering the custody period, 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-petitioners – 1) Sohanram @ Sohan Lal Vishnoi S/o Bhiyaram & 2) Sandeep Gupta Alias Sandy Son Of Shri Vijendra, shall be released on bail provided each of them furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court with the stipulation that they shall [2026:RJ-JP:27344] (4 of 4) [CRLMB-6769/2026] 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-petitioners shall not involve in any other offence(s) during currency of the bail and they shall mark their presence once in three months in the concerned police station. 9. 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 station, as directed above, the concerned SHO is directed to immediately report the matter to the concerned Court in this regard. 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. Office is directed to send copy of this order to the concerned SHO for necessary compliance. 12. The observations 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. s(ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J 244-245/AMAN