[2026:RJ-JP:2891] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 1167/2026 1. Mohin S/o Akram, Aged About 20 Years, R/o Alamshah, Police Station Sikri, District Deeg. (At Present Confined In Sub Jail, District Deeg). 2. Sachin S/o Harveer Singh, Aged About 19 Years, R/o Alamshah, Police Station Sikri, District Deeg. (At Present Confined In Sub Jail, District Deeg). 3. Juber S/o Inni Khan @ Dunni, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Alamshah, Police Station Sikri, District Deeg. (At Present Confined In Sub Jail, District Deeg). 4. Jamshed @ Jammas S/o Supat, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Alamshah, Police Station Sikri, District Deeg. (At Present Confined In Sub Jail, District Deeg). ----Petitioners Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mohd. Shakir Khan For Respondent(s) : Mr. Amit Punia, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 22/01/2026 1. The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS on behalf of the petitioners, who have been arrested in connection with FIR No.91/2025 registered at Police Station Sikari, District Deeg for offences punishable under Sections 319(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 317(2), 317(4), 317(5), 303(2), 111(2)(a), 313 & 61(2) of the BNS & Section 66D of the Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that the accused-petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. Learned counsel submits that except police interrogation of the [2026:RJ-JP:2891] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-1167/2026] co-accused persons, no other evidence is available on record against the petitioners. It is submitted that co-accused person who was apprehended at the spot, has been granted benefit of bail by this Court. Trial of the case will take considerable time in its conclusion. He contends that the petitioners are in custody since their date of arrest and there are no criminal antecedents against them. Further custody of the petitioners would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners. 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 parties, especially the fact that petitioners were not apprehended at the spot and co-accused person who was apprehended at the spot, has been granted benefit of bail by this Court; trial will take time in its conclusion; absence of criminal antecedents 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-petitioners – 1) Mohin S/o Akram, 2) Sachin S/o Harveer Singh, 3) Juber S/o Inni Khan @ Dunni & 4) Jamshed @ Jammas S/o Supat shall be released on bail provided, each of them furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs Only) together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.2,50,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Fifty [2026:RJ-JP:2891] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-1167/2026] Thousand Only) each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court with the stipulation that they 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-petitioners shall not involve in any other offence(s) during currency of the bail and they shall mark their presence in first 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 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 observation 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. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J GAUTAM JAIN /27