[2026:RJ-JP:13213] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 2nd Bail Application No. 4549/2026 1. Rashid S/o Ishra, Aged About 21 Years, R/o Tilakpuri Police Station Pahari District Deeg (Rajasthan) (At Present Confined In District Jail Deeg). 2. Naim S/o Ayub, Aged About 22 Years, R/o Tilakpuri Police Station Pahari District Deeg (Rajasthan) (At Present Confined In District Jail Deeg). 3. Sakil S/o Sahid, Aged About 20 Years, R/o Tilakpuri Police Station Pahari District Deeg (Rajasthan) (At Present Confined In District Jail Deeg). ----Petitioners Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent Connected With S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 2nd Bail Application No. 4717/2026 1. Sahil S/o Jamil, Aged About 20 Years, R/o Village Paldi, Police Station Pahari, District Deeg, (Rajasthan) (Currently In District Jail Deeg). 2. Ummar S/o Hamalludin, aged about 30 Years, R/o Village Paldi, Police Station Pahari, District Deeg, (Rajasthan) (Currently In District Jail Deeg). ----Petitioners Versus State Of Rajasthan through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vafik Choudhary Mr. Harendra Singh with Mr. Shivam Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Jeetendra Singh Rathore, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP TANEJA Order 30/03/2026 1. These second bail applications have been filed by the accused-petitioners under Section 483 of BNSS in connection with [2026:RJ-JP:13213] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-4549/2026] FIR No.335/2025 registered at Police Station Pahari, District Deeg for offence(s) under Section(s) 319(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 61(2)(a) of BNS and Section 66-D of IT Act. 2. The first bail applications were dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file afresh, after filing of charge-sheet. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the accused- petitioners have been falsely implicated in these cases and have nothing to do with the alleged offences. Learned counsel further submits that after investigation, charge-sheet has been filed in these matters and petitioners are not required for further custodial interrogation. 4. Learned counsel also submits that there are no criminal antecedents against petitioners; they are in custody since 24.12.2025 and no recovery is required to be made from the petitioners; therefore, no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioners in custody, hence, petitioners may be enlarged on bail. 5. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposes the bail applications and submits that the said offences involve serious cyber fraud activity. He further submits that there are four complaints against Sahil and one complaint each against Naim and Sakil on the National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal. Hence, benefit of bail should not be granted to the petitioners. 6. Taking into consideration the overall facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioners, the fact that investigation has been completed; charge-sheet has been filed and conclusion of trial will take considerable long time, without commenting anything on the [2026:RJ-JP:13213] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-4549/2026] merits / demerits of the case, this Court deems it just and proper to enlarge the petitioners on bail. 7. Therefore, the second bail applications are allowed and accused-petitioners (1) Rashid S/o Ishra (2) Naim S/o Ayub, (3) Sakil S/o Sahid (4) Sahil S/o Jamil and (5) Ummar S/o Hamalludin are ordered to be released on bail, provided, each of them furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the trial Court, with the stipulation that the petitioners shall appear before that Court on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so. 8. The accused - petitioners are directed to mark their presence before the concerned Police Station on the 15th date of every month till conclusion of trial. The SHO of the concerned Police Station shall forward petitioners' attendance report to the trial Court on the same day of each month. 9. In case of any breach of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Public Prosecutor shall be at liberty to move an application against the petitioners for cancellation of bail before the concerned Court. 10. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the concerned SHO for necessary compliance. (SANDEEP TANEJA),J TN/1-2