[2026:RJ-JP:28211] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Third Bail Application No. 11127/2026 URN: CRLMB / 20586U / 2026 Khushiram Jat @ Khushiram Fouji S/o Sh. Raghunath Jat, Aged About 26 Years, R/o Village Khandach, Tehsil Kisangarh, P.s. Bandar Sindari, District Ajmer (Raj.) (At Present In Judicial Custody In Central Jail, Ajmer). ----Petitioner Versus The State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Majhar Hussain For Respondent(s) : Ms. Arti Sharma, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 22/07/2026 1. This third bail application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been preferred on behalf of the accused-petitioner in connection with FIR No.614/2024 registered at Police Station Christian Ganj, District Ajmer for offences punishable under Sections 189(2), 115(2), 126(2), 352, 310(2), 140(3), 62, 326(g) and 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, (in short 'BNS') 2023. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the first bail application filed on behalf of the petitioner was allowed by this Court vide order dated 07.08.2025 subject to the condition that he shall not involve in any other offence during the currency of bail and he shall mark his presence in the first week of every month at [2026:RJ-JP:28211] (2 of 4) [CRLMB-11127/2026] the concerned police station till conclusion of the trial. Counsel submits that the bail granted to the petitioner came to be cancelled by the learned trial Court vide order dated 15.11.2025 on account of alleged violation of the aforesaid conditions. Thereafter, the petitioner preferred a second bail application before this Court which was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 25.05.2026 while granting liberty to file fresh bail application before the learned trial Court. Pursuant thereto, the petitioner filed a bail application before the learned trial Court however, same was rejected vide order dated 03.07.2026. Counsel submits that after the petitioner was released on bail, he was falsely implicated in subsequent criminal cases, pursuant to which he was arrested and remained in judicial custody. It is submitted that the alleged involvement in those cases is false and has been instituted solely to deprive the petitioner from the benefit of bail. Counsel submits that since the petitioner was in judicial custody, it was impossible for him to comply with the condition requiring him to mark his monthly attendance at the concerned police station. It is submitted that the alleged breach of both bail conditions was neither deliberate nor intentional and occurred due to circumstances beyond the control of the petitioner. Counsel submits that the charge-sheet has been filed and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. In these circumstances, it is prayed that this third bail application may be allowed. 3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposes the submissions advanced on behalf of the petitioner and submits that the petitioner was granted the concession of bail by this Court [2026:RJ-JP:28211] (3 of 4) [CRLMB-11127/2026] subject to specific conditions, which he has failed to comply with. Counsel submits that after his release on bail, the petitioner became involved in subsequent criminal cases, leading to registration of fresh FIRs against him. Counsel submits that in view of the breach of the conditions imposed while granting bail, particularly the condition restraining him from involving himself in any other offence during the currency of bail, the learned trial Court has rightly cancelled the bail granted to the petitioner. In these circumstances, it is prayed that this third bail application maybe dismissed. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 5. This Court is conscious of the fact that the petitioner has failed to adhere to the conditions imposed while granting him bail earlier, however, at the same time, it is also pertinent to note that the petitioner has remained in custody since November, 2025, investigation in the present case stands concluded as charge- sheet has already been filed and no further custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required, therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances and in the interest of justice, this Court deems it fit and proper to enlarge the accused petitioner on bail. 6. Accordingly, this third bail application is allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner- Khushiram Jat @ Khushiram Fouji S/o Sh. Raghunath Jat, shall be released on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.50,000/- each to the [2026:RJ-JP:28211] (4 of 4) [CRLMB-11127/2026] 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. However, it is made clear that the conditions imposed upon the accused-petitioner in S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.9245/2025 vide order dated 07.08.2025 shall remain intact and the petitioner is directed to comply with the said conditions. 8. The observations made hereinabove are only for decision of the bail application and would not have any impact on the trial of the case in any manner. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J 7/LALIT MOHAN