[2026:RJ-JP:1402] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 15170/2025 Vikram Kumar S/o Prabhulal, age 20 Years, Resident of Sarsop, Police Choki Shivad, Police Station Choth Ka Barwada District Sawai Madhopur. (At Present Confined in District Jail Sawai Madhopur). ----Petitioner Versus The State of Rajasthan through PP ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Tarun Jain For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vivek Choudhary, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 13/01/2026 1. This bail application under Section 483 of BNSS has been filed on behalf of the petitioner, who has been arrested in connection with FIR No.272/2025 registered at Police Station Choth Ka Barwada, District Sawai Madhopur (Raj.) for offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 319(2), 336(2), 303(2) & 340(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, (in short ‘BNS’) 2023, Section 13 of Rajasthan Public Gambling Ordinance, 1949 and Section 66D of Information Technology Act, 2008. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the accused-petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Counsel submits that there is no private complaint against the petitioner and he has been made accused solely on the basis of the fact that some Apps have been found in his mobile phone. [2026:RJ-JP:1402] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-15170/2025] Counsel submits that alleged offences are triable by Magistrate. Counsel submits that there are no criminal antecedents against the petitioner and trial will take considerable time in its conclusion. He argues that the petitioner is in custody since 01.11.2025 and further custody of the petitioner would not serve any fruitful purpose. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the bail application. 4. I have considered the contentions. 5. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case; considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner, as also the fact that alleged offences are triable by Magistrate; there are no criminal antecedents against the petitioner; trial will take considerable time in its conclusion 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. 6. The bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner- Vikram Kumar S/o Prabhulal shall be released on bail provided he 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 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 petitioner shall not involve in similar offence(s) during currency of bail granted by this Court. [2026:RJ-JP:1402] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-15170/2025] The petitioner is further directed to mark his presence in the concerned police station once in every three months, till trial is concluded. 8. Concerned SHO shall enter the attendance of the petitioner in the Roznamcha. In case the petitioner fails to mark his 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. 9. If breach of any 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 petitioner by this Court. 10. Office is directed to send copy of this order to the concerned SHO for necessary compliance. 11. 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 LALIT MOHAN /30