[2026:RJ-JP:12789] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 16500/2025 Ramawatar Jat S/o Tinkuram Jat, Aged About 44 Years, R/o Village Ghatwada, Police Station Chandwaji, District Jaipur Rural. (At Present Confined At Central Jail Ghatgate Jaipur). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Krishan Chander Sharma For Respondent(s) For Complainant(s) : : Ms. Arti Sharma, PP Mr. Dhanna Lal Meena for Mr. Rajesh Kumar Sharma. Mr. Sarthak Choubey HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 27/03/2026 1. This bail application has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS, on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.358/2024 registered at Police Station Samod, District Jaipur Rural for offences punishable under Sections 420, 406, 506 & 120B of IPC. After completion of investigation, police filed charge-sheet in this matter for offences punishable under Sections 420, 406 & 120B of IPC, Sections 4, 5 & 6 of Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1978 and Section 3/21 of the Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes Act, 2019. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Learned counsel contends that petitioner was booked simultaneously in five cases [2026:RJ-JP:12789] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-16500/2025] alleging therein that he induced different persons to invest the money to earn handsome returns. It is submitted that in four other cases, he has been granted benefit of bail by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court. Learned counsel contends that charge-sheet has been filed and trial will take time in its conclusion. It is contended that petitioner is in custody since 25.11.2025 and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor assisted by learned counsel for the complainant vehemently opposes the submissions advanced on behalf of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the complainant submits that petitioner is the mastermind of this case, however, he fairly concedes that in other cases, he has been granted benefit of bail. 4. Heard. Perused the material available on record. 5. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances; considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, and the fact that in other identical matters, benefit of bail has been extended to the petitioner by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, as also the fact that charge-sheet has been filed and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion as well as looking to the custody period, but without expressing any opinion on merits/ demerits of this case, I deem it proper to allow the bail application. 6. This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner - Ramawatar Jat S/o Tinkuram Jat, shall be released on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in [2026:RJ-JP:12789] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-16500/2025] 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 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. It is made clear that the accused-petitioner shall not involve in any other offence(s) during currency of the bail and he shall mark his presence in the first week of every month in the concerned police station, till trial is concluded. 8. Concerned SHO shall enter attendance of the petitioner in the Roznamcha. In case the petitioner fails to mark his presence in the concerned police station, the concerned SHO is directed to immediately report the matter to the concerned Court in this regard. 9. 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 him by this Court. 10. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the concerned SHO for necessary compliance. 11. 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 CHARU SONI /13